Printable View
I wanted to hear it from the real gaming freaks back here because I trust your opinion more than the random, "man-on-the-street" opinions that make up most of the ETW fora. I kinda missed out on the first impressions because I had no idea Empire would be released this early; I'm still stuck in RTW, "maybe next year" mode. That, and I had no interest in the game itself.
So, what are the first impressions? Good, bad, just okay?
Wrong forum :winkg:
From what I've read (don't have the game) it's really does sound like there are two completely different games out there. One has good AI and overall plays very well. The other has RTW level idiot AI, crashes constantly and is bug-ridden. The bizarre thing is that I'm seeing a variety of people whose opinion I respect in each camp, so I can't dismiss it as hype, inexperience, over-experience, or whatever else. It truly does read like there are two different games bearing the same title and outward appearance.
Anyway, I'll boot the topic to where those with the game can see it.
She couldn’t be more right about two camps. But it was the same with Rome if I remember.
The everything is a bug bunch, and the your crazy if you don’t love it group.
The demo is free on Steam and while it is slow and not so stable it is worth a look.
My copy of the game is lost in the mail or I would give you a clearer picture.
All the same, while it does seem to have some issues in spots they are working like beavers to get it up to snuff…we have the second patch out today and one due next week…that alone is something to be startled at.
And I know you will get an ear full from others.
Cheers! ~:cheers:
In my opinion it is a good, fun and playable game with a huge heaping helping of potential.
Unfortunately it is also bug-ridden (although nothing too serious yet), unpolished, and missing certain things that would help flesh it out.
The gameplay is great, the AI is definitely better than RTW and M2TW. Most of the new game mechanics are spot on. The game could use a lot more variety however, since only 12 factions are playable without mods (in both the campaign and custom battles).
What the game really needs are patches, bugfixes and a few good mods to add in some variety. With those things out it will truly be the best strategy game on the market today. :2thumbsup:
I'm personally fairly content thus far- however, it should be noted that I'm a more passive style of player, and I've only played as the Dutch so far. Its a far from perfect product, but I feel like the state of the game right now is as polished as any TW game since MTW(and Shogun, probably).
My main complaints thus far- The AI does not do a good enough job of keeping strong garrisons in its colonial possessions, and it is not adequately aggressive enough in is use of transporting troops via its navies, and is rather odd in its unwillingness to deal with me when I'm the one approaching them. I've also had the Spanish continually approaching me to try and trade for the same province over and over again despite the fact that I keep refusing- thankfully, the offers are at least different most of the time from the last one.
Biggest pros for me so far- the battle AI is far more competent than previous titles, the AI is unified and thus the diplomats and military are on the same page. I like the overall structure of the game as well. The relative lack of unit variety forces the player to be more tactical, as there really aren't any "uber units" like the last titles.
All in all, I'm giving the game about an 8.5 out of 10 right now.
I personally love the game. I give it at least a 9.5/10. The campaign AI might be fairly passive, but the battle AI has surprized me a LOT already in just the short time I've played it. (You can't just sit back with artillery and bombard their army to nothingness anymore :dizzy2:).
I definitely love coming home at the end of the day and booting up some E:TW action to unwind. :beam:
Fast summary
Good:
New campaign mechanics: technology, trading, towns and farms, diplomacy no longer enacted by diplomats, no more rebels but many independent minded minor nations
Battle AI is pretty decent most of the time
Battles feel slower. Different age, different kind of tactics.
Good graphics, amazing animations.
Sea battles. (I suck at those though)
Multiplayer connection and support is so much better than Rome and M2
All the additions and removals are good, such as removal of diplomats, and being able to record replays in campaign battles.
Bad:
Campaign AI not much of a challenge (so far)
Battle AI is screwy some times
Road to Independence was really buggy for me
IMO the game doesn't feel optimized enough, performance wise
Random bugs, and bad AI at times
I'm not sure if it is my interest in the period or a true reflection on the qualityof the game, but I'd say this is the best TW so far.
The campaing mechanics in particular seem to be more involving to me. The GC always seemed to be the fluff between the meat of the game previously - the battles. No longer. The diplomacy, research and trade are much more polished than in previous versions. So far (1724) I've been left pretty much alone in Europe as Britain, Poland-Lithuania are at war with me, but that is as a result of some dispute I was dragged into by my Prussian allies. I have striven to play one nation off against another whilst strengthening my position elsewhere and not pissing any neighbours off too much - seems to be working. I like to think it is my diplomacy that is keeping the status quo, but we shall see if itsn't an overly passive campaign AI.
The battle AI is certainly not passive anymore. Opponents move and take the initiative in ETW. They don't always take what you might think was the best course of action, but this is a £30 game not a multi-million $ staff college simulator. On the whole opponents play to their strengths, cavalry circles, native melee units run in as fast possible, archers (there are some) stay infuriatingly just out of reach. As has been said above, the relative similarity of the units does force you to think about your tactics rather than relying on your trumpcard unit. a point to be made is that European armies did look very much alike and they do vary in their stats in the game, the French having a slightlly higher attack but worse defence than say the British (I believe).
The naval battles are brilliant. People have complained that thye are too chaotic and random, that there isn't enough control and tadtics. Well, not to belittle Hornblower and other Jack Aubreys, but it has always been my understanding that this is exactly how it was. The men of the Enlightnement spent years trying to enforce order and control on naval warfare only for the winners to be those who could load, fire and aim their guns the fastest in 9 cases outof 10. An illusion if you ask me. Engagements where the Line of Battle was strictly adhered to by both sides rarely seemto have produced decisive results. The greatest victories seem to have gone to those that concentrated their forces and charged in, Nelson not least. You really do get the feeling of a melee as ships crash into each other, bits are blown off and you can see the damage meter telling you one more broadside and you're sleeping with the fish.
In terms of the graphics and how well the game runs, this can only be prefixed with the usual PC gaming caveats. It depends on your system and all those other semi-controlable variables, like drivers, process running and blind luck. On my system, a Q6600 running at 3.6, an ATI 3870x2, 2 gig of memory and XP sp3 it looks briiliant (especially the naval battles). But there is always the chance that someone else with an apparently identical or superior system can't run it at all...
You are right the game does seem ot have polarised opinion, but I really am not sure where people are such a radically different experience from me. Apart from those random PC related gameply issues, if the game can run decently technically I would say it delivers the best TW (on release) to date, 8.5/10.