The Daily Update at the Com

Copied this from the Com. They have started a thread telling us what they are doing.

Quote:

---

April 8th:


Just thought I would make a post about where things are, where things are going and what we plan on doing.
First off, we are going to support Empire for a long time. The first game play patch with both a lot of fixes and balancing/economic changes as well as more is in testing, and then the cycle of hot fixes then game play patches will begin again. At the moment every programmer is focused on fixing bugs.

What balance/economic/other changes will be in the first game play patch?
Quite a lot really. Unit balancing has seem some general tweaks across the board to improve it. Unit costs have changed for both multiplayer and single player.
For multiplayer there are now separate costs for early and late era so that units better reflect the techs available, and units such as mortars and rocket ships have had big cost increases and light infantry have had their cost increased a bit as well.
For single player, unit costs have increased on normal, even more on hard and even more on very hard so that on very hard units cost 4x their upkeep cost. Bigger ships have had their cost increased and all ships upkeep costs have increased.
There have also been general economic tweaks to prevent the huge sums of money that were possible in the late game, and so to increase the challenge of the game.
As for the other changes, we've added in a delete save game button, a button to allow you to view battle replays from the single player Play Battle menu, improved ship grouping UI and other things.
There are also of course AI improvements and yes naval invasions though they may be rare for now.

What you going to do after that?
Well we are going to carry on fixing and improving the game. The AI (both battle and campaign) will see continuous improvements, multiplayer will see improvements, there will be more balancing improvements, and some nice free stuff you'll be hearing about in due time.
From a personal perspective as someone working on unit balancing, the next game play patch after this one will see some big improvements in terms of diversification of different unit and artillery types. The game play patch after that one will see improvements to naval battle balancing.

So what are you getting at?
We are going to carry on supporting Empire for a long time. We are going to carry on improving Empire. You'll see more as things get done.



Jack.

---

http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/53425

"There are also of course AI improvements and yes naval invasions though they may be rare for now."
ahem what?
so France and Great Brittain will get to india how? or attack each other how? I am shaking my head in disbelief here. what does RARE FOR NOW mean?

Jack Lusted at the Com

Quote:

---

There were bugs preventing naval invasions that have been fixed for next patch, however balancing the priorities of them against other things will take more time hence why for now they will likely be rare but occuring after the gameplay patch, but improving more over time as we continually improve the AI.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smellycat

I am shaking my head in disbelief here. what does RARE FOR NOW mean?

---

Perhaps it means as rare as they were in real life....

naval invasoion just means transporting troops by sea, thats not rare

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smellycat

naval invasoion just means transporting troops by sea, thats not rare

---

Well perhaps nations ferrying troops between their own regions wasn't(to me that is the main issue, not naval invasions of enemy territory), but you know how CA usually work. They go from one extreme to another, I was worried the next patch would suddenly see random three or four unit armies landed on your territory a la BI.exe for RTW or M2TW where you would see Portugal land armies in Wales every campaign. I am very pleased they intend to change it slowly and not go for a massive overhaul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnhughthom

Well perhaps nations ferrying troops between their own regions wasn't(to me that is the main issue, not naval invasions of enemy territory), but you know how CA usually work. They go from one extreme to another, I was worried the next patch would suddenly see random three or four unit armies landed on your territory a la BI.exe for RTW or M2TW where you would see Portugal land armies in Wales every campaign. I am very pleased they intend to change it slowly and not go for a massive overhaul.

---

Well, come to think of it: the only purposeful AI naval invasions I have so far seen in TW games took place in Stainless Steel mod of MTW2...

All the vanilla game invasions usually involved some AI's units (or lone faction heirs) being shipped to some obscure lands and left there to wander (or sit) aimlessly...

A couple exceptions: in vanilla RTW, Carthage used to land forces to take Corsica. but that was scripted I think pluse - unless destroyed, Carthage would land a force (to be destroyed by Romans) in Corsica every other turn... The other exceptions that I noticed were in MTW2: Byzantines would consistently land forces in Crete while Sicilians would go for Tunisia and western Greece. Again, these invasions were most likely scripted.

I hope, CA does something more creative with ETW in this department.

I am pleased to know what they are working on at least, and an indication of their appreciation of what is or isn't a priority. I personaly hope CA are dealing with what we see as a priority first, and what they see as easy to do second. No one wants to big issues to be un-touched and carried over throughout various patches.

Ok now I only saw this in my first game, I've never seen it since & I'm not sure where they came from...But I invaded India & had a small stack of Dutch come marching up into my territory. Not Portugese, Dutch.

Now they weren't at war with everyone on the map, so the only way they could have got there is by landing.

Course never seen it again & don't expect to, its by far the worst bug in the game. That and AI factions massive F.A.G (Fear of Aggressive Gaming) factor, VH/VH, nobody attacks me!

Yes it will get better, no doubt...But geez fix the blindingly obvious game killer, *omg this games getting boring* bugs first.

Rant ends.

They may have just traded territory...

Any naval invasion is good enough for me. As long as it means Spain can get rid of their piles of units once every 5 turns, that's fine :D

Same goes for them actually re-enforcing troops in the Americas, instead of leaving me to annihilate them.

Problem: I hope Naval invasions by the Ai doesn't mean the Pirates will be nerfed at turn 5...

i hope they fix some obvious diplomatic bugs too. for some reason offering a 2500 dollar gift and 3 enlightment techs, 2 military techs and an industrial tech doesnt seem to be enough to get my ALLY to trade with me.....

and why is it everyone refuses to trade with me?i mean, sometims my allies or people i am "very friendly" with will refuse trade. trade is good for everyone!! why refuse it?!

This is the kind of stuff I like to see, forward looking comments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John-117

i hope they fix some obvious diplomatic bugs too. for some reason offering a 2500 dollar gift and 3 enlightment techs, 2 military techs and an industrial tech doesnt seem to be enough to get my ALLY to trade with me.....

and why is it everyone refuses to trade with me?i mean, sometims my allies or people i am "very friendly" with will refuse trade. trade is good for everyone!! why refuse it?!

---

On my H campaign I have not had a problem getting trade agreements with as many nations as my ports would bear. If one faction refuses, I go to another...

I suspect, trade refusal has something to do with the random AI personalities: some are more mercantilistic than others. After all, mercantilism (keeping trade internal and "protected") was not such an unpopular idea in the time period considered.

I think this is very good news. Jack Lusted deserves a lot of respect for his work on previous games and the fact that he is taking the time to make such a statement suggests that it may reach a point where I'll allow myself to play it.

It seems like mostly good news.

Rare invasions is good. I hate them spamming loads of armies and putting them ashore on every little dirt clod. If it were just France trying to go to England or England intervening on the content that would just about be enough.

We will just have to see how the upkeep and price increases impact the play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigal

Ok now I only saw this in my first game, I've never seen it since & I'm not sure where they came from...But I invaded India & had a small stack of Dutch come marching up into my territory. Not Portugese, Dutch.

Now they weren't at war with everyone on the map, so the only way they could have got there is by landing.

Course never seen it again & don't expect to, its by far the worst bug in the game. That and AI factions massive F.A.G (Fear of Aggressive Gaming) factor, VH/VH, nobody attacks me!

Yes it will get better, no doubt...But geez fix the blindingly obvious game killer, *omg this games getting boring* bugs first.

Rant ends.

---

Dont the Dutch have Celyon and another mainland India province?? I have not played in India yet so i am not sure.

No, Ceylon is an island, and only the Portuguese have a mainland territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phog_of_War

Dont the Dutch have Celyon and another mainland India province?? I have not played in India yet so i am not sure.

---

ceylon is an island, and the only non-indian faction with an indian mainland province at start is portugal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

We will just have to see how the upkeep and price increases impact the play.

---

I hope that it improves the mid and end game. No spamming of stacks by the human player and the AI (Spain garrisoned by 25 stacks) I hope.

I hope that CA nerves the minor powers and make the great powers more aggressive. Small states should be looking for help from major powers, not destroying them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monsieur Alphonse

Small states should be looking for help from major powers, not destroying them.

---

Remembers a small tribe of ~ 600 cavalrymen eventually conquering Byzantium, Serbia, Hungary, Bosnia, Albania, Mamluke Syria and Egypt, the Caucauses, and what is today Iraq and Iran, and sending fleets as far as Ireland and Burma.

Also remembers a small group of rebels turned revolutionaries, whose navy by 1945 was larger than all the rest of the world's navies combined - and most of those navies were ships built by said nation...

I don't have a problem with a minor power rising to a major power status. It should take time, and effort though.

I also don't have a problem if one minor nation becomes very strong, but this was the age of rivalry between GB and France (aka the second hundred years war), the rise of Prussia, the dividing of Poland etc. The small powers allied with the big ones to get some help.

In this game France is a nice kitten without claws. The struggle for colonies between England, France and Spain never takes place. France was trying during the 18th century (and before and after) to dominate Southern Germany and Italy. The small states that should feel threatened by France are more dangerous to France then vice versa. When the strength of Spain was weakening France was trying to get influence there as well. Because of the alliance between France and Spain from the beginning this never takes place.

I don't want a simulation of the eighteenth century but there are great opportunities for war that never materialize.

second update

Quote:

---

April 9th


Hi there everyone, today we thought we would post a follow up to yesterday's daily update as there was a lot of response to it.

How come you are focusing on balancing and not fixing bugs?

We are not. The designers are working on balancing improvements, and the programmers on code fixes. Work on one does not preclude work on the other. It is not a case of we can work on balancing or fixes, it's a case of we can do both, so we are.

You're quadrupling upkeep costs!?!

No, the recruitment cost of units on very hard will be 4x their upkeep cost. Upkeep costs are actually reducing slightly. This confusion was caused by poor wording in yesterdays update.

Why didn't you mention fixes for such and such?

As a designer I do not work with code so I am not aware of all the fixes that have been done. This does not mean there haven't been any. We are fixing the sound issues people have been reporting, crashes and lots of other bugs.

Some examples of fixes in the upcoming patch are:

- Fixed audio volume dropping following advisor
- General sound balance changes
- Campaign map optimisations, and general crash fixes
- General stability improvements and crash fixes- General optimisation tweaks- An array of fixes and tweaks to improve AI aggression levels
- Fix Video Stutter

There are a lot more fixes than those coming in the patch.


And what did you mean by rare naval invasions for now?

We've fixed the bugs that were preventing the AI from doing naval invasions, but that did not mean they would suddenly start doing them all the time. The priority for them needs to be balanced against all the other items that have priorities for the AI and this will take a while to get right. We are going to continuously improve the AI so the amount of naval invasions will keep on getting better from the initial fix that is coming in the next patch.

What about multiplayer?

More maps are coming. When is still being discussed but you will see more maps at some point(mostly 4v4s, 3v3s and 2v2s).

The problem with cheaters being able to edit unit stats and costs without problem for multiplayer has been fixed and will be in the next patch.

Other multiplayer improvements are still being discussed.

We will also continue to work to fix bugs with multiplayer.

As this weekend is Easter Bank Holiday weekend in the UK, there will not be anymore Daily Updates until Tuesday. Hope you all have a good weekend.

Jack.

---

I hope the wait-10/15seconds-for-audio bug will indeed be fixed. It is such an odd bug though. I suffer from it when selecting Paris (in my current UP game), and some of my naval units (especially if they are in port), but not with most other stacks & cities.

As for the post above that: Hopefully the colonial rivalries will show up with naval invasions bug being fixed. I agree that the European 1-region minors need to be nerfed. They get a huge bonus for both economy & research, making their armies deadly to the so-called "major" powers. Larger "minor" powers, such as Denmark and Persia, aren't that bad. They seem to behave just like the "major" powers.

As I said before, I don't mind minors growing into majors if a power vacuum exists. But the way Austria, Spain, France, Sweeden, Prussia, Poland, Russia & the Ottoman AIs are, there are far too many power vacuums in Europe.

a.i. needt to be more agressive. not onec have i had an invasion of my provinces larger than 3 units burning some farms. and only 2 times have i had my port blockaded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John-117

only 2 times have i had my port blockaded.

---

While I agree the AI is not aggressive enough in general, in each campaign I have played the AI has been quick to blockade a port I have left poorly defended, especially the port in my home region.

Quote:

---

For single player, unit costs have increased on normal, even more on hard and even more on very hard so that on very hard units cost 4x their upkeep cost. Bigger ships have had their cost increased and all ships upkeep costs have increased.

---

A little surprised at this . . . if anything, it feels there should be more units on the map, not less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NimitsTexan

A little surprised at this . . . if anything, it feels there should be more units on the map, not less.

---

oh thats for us not the AI

Yeah, but if things need balancing, you could lower the cost for the AI (giving it more troops), not raise the cost for humans.

Also, it is sort of counterintutive to the real logistic situations faced by European power. Building armies (and, to a lesser extent) navies was the "cheap" part; keeping them manned and supplied was what was more expensive. Raising an army quickly should be doable, but the player should also be encouraged to disband unnecessary units in time of peace. But that change looks slow the raising of armies and make it more beneficial to maintain a large standing army indefinately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NimitsTexan

Yeah, but if things need balancing, you could lower the cost for the AI (giving it more troops), not raise the cost for humans.

Also, it is sort of counterintutive to the real logistic situations faced by European power. Building armies (and, to a lesser extent) navies was the "cheap" part; keeping them manned and supplied was what was more expensive. Raising an army quickly should be doable, but the player should also be encouraged to disband unnecessary units in time of peace. But that change looks slow the raising of armies and make it more beneficial to maintain a large standing army indefinately.

---

Oh IDD, I also think just making troops more expensive is taking the easy way out and does not equate better campaign AI