GS Preview

[Mailman653]

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/empire-total-war/901296p1.html

[rajpoot]

Absolutly smashing!!
I can't wait for 2009.

[CBR]

..you can also use rough gunpowder charges to lay down a very basic minefield.

Yeah amazing alright...


CBR

[PBI]

..you can also use rough gunpowder charges to lay down a very basic minefield.

Yeah amazing alright...

Hmm, I raised an eyebrow at that too. Although, according to wikipedia:

In Europe in the early eighteenth century, improvised land mines or booby traps were constructed in the form of bombs buried in shallow wells in the earth and covered with scrap metal and/or gravel to serve as shrapnel. Known in French as fougasse, the term is sometimes still used in the present day to describe such devices. This technique was used in several European wars of the eighteenth Century, the American Revolution, and the American Civil War.

So long as it won't be the case that every battlefield ends up covered end to end with landmines which can each wipe out a whole unit by itself. Hopefully it will be more of a one-time trick, which won't do that much damage but will scare the out of the unit that marches over it.

Some interesting tidbits on governments and taxes, looks like government change will work pretty much like civil wars in MTW. The idea of using taxation to manipulate population flow also sounds intriguing.

EDIT: Well, it sounds interesting if you're me. I just re-read that sentence and realised it really doesn't sound very interesting the way I've written it.

[Warmaster Horus]

Depends how much the AI will use it.

Other than that, I'm getting more and more interested in E:TW. Previews like this one are more appealing to me, seeing how I prefer land battles.

[CBR]

Hmm, I raised an eyebrow at that too. Although, according to wikipedia:

Yes something used in sieges or fixed defensive positions. This seems to be a special ability for some units to be used in regular battles.


CBR

[Discoman]

AI covering a retreat? Sounds awesome!

Despite the scope of the game Creative Assembly is working to make the grand campaign more manageable. For one thing, factions may have unique goals other than "conquer the known world." Players can attempt to win based on their nation's prestige (earned through technology research, diplomacy, or military prowess). Another country might win if it establishes itself as a republic and maintains a stable government for X number of years.

Best news yet!

[Warmaster Horus]

I missed that last part. Sounds like CA is trying to bring back some features of MTW. All good news!

[Martok]

I'll admit, I liked most of what I read in the preview (although I too am a bit skeptical about the minefield comment). I especially like that Gamespy specifically discussed the AI -- they generally don't talk about AI unless it's worth mentioning. I do think it odd, however, that the second government type is a "democratic" monarchy. What was wrong with constitutional monarchy?

Still, that's more nitpicking than a serious criticism. The more I see of Empire, the more I'm starting to look forward to it.

[Mailman653]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/901/901519p1.html
IGN Preview......with five NEW screen shots.

[Sheogorath]

I've never been a strict 'historical accuracy' guy, but all this talk of gunpowder landmines is starting to remind me of the panzerphants.

[Csargo]

INFO *gobble* *gobble*

[anders]

I do think it odd, however, that the second government type is a "democratic" monarchy. What was wrong with constitutional monarchy?

thats probably just gamespy not using the correct term, constitutional monarchy is the correct name of the concept they describe.

[Mount Suribachi]

OOh, I like the hint that we will see a return to GA style games

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Some clarifications:

The "land mines" are Fougasse - Early version of landmine used in prepared positions by defending forces only. Only certain units get them and only if they are defending and only if they have had a turn to prepare them.

The government type is Constitutional Monarchy - Not a "democratic monarchy" as you guys so rightly have pointed out.

[hoom]

only if they have had a turn to prepare them.

As in, the army has to have been static for a turn? I like that.

On the other side, will there be sap mines (wall breaching big bang type) available to some units on siege attack?

[rajpoot]

As in, the army has to have been static for a turn? I like that.

I think by 'defending forces 'Intrepid meant defence of forts and cities, i.e seige battles only, not in regular ones. Like placing mines outside the walls while enemy prepares his attack (in a turn).

Wouldn't make much sense for two hostile armies sitting face to face in the field for one whole turn would it.

[PBI]

Some clarifications:

The "land mines" are Fougasse - Early version of landmine used in prepared positions by defending forces only. Only certain units get them and only if they are defending and only if they have had a turn to prepare them.

Thanks for clearing that up. Interesting that you mention troops taking a turn to prepare defensive positions, does it mean troops can "dig in" and prepare field fortifications in lieu of moving that turn?

Incidentally, could someone clarify for me what is the difference between a constitutional monarchy and a democratic monarchy? I thought they were the same thing; the UK is often described as the former even though it is democratic and does not have a constitution (or does Magna Carta count?)

[pevergreen]

Australia is a constitutional Monarchy, we have a constitution I guess?

I knew everyone would come around to my point of view with E:TW. It seems so long ago that I was the only person here thinking this would be good.

[Intrepid Sidekick]

I can neither confirm nor deny anything more about prepared positions and fougasse.

Dont worry about the Constitutional vs Democratic thing too much. Its a legal definition. There are very distinct differences but they are a bit dry and dull to go in to. Wikipedia has a reasonably good article on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Monarchy

[Ignoramus]

Well considering they the gunpowder mines were used in the Leipzig battle, which involved a settlement, I'd say it probably does only apply to siege not field battles.

[seireikhaan]

I have to admit, I very well might consider buying ETW( assuming it indeed can run on my computer), if Gamespy is indeed accurate in that the AI is vastly improved in these areas. My only question now is whether or not the campaign AI can, as a whole, manage to NOT backstab me every 10 turns just for kicks like it seems to do in M2.

[Vuk]

I can neither confirm nor deny anything more about prepared positions and fougasse.

Dont worry about the Constitutional vs Democratic thing too much. Its a legal definition. There are very distinct differences but they are a bit dry and dull to go in to. Wikipedia has a reasonably good article on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Monarchy

Gunpowder mines were also used in battles in India that did not involve "settlements" of fortifications. If an army is not ambushed and has resonable time to set up defensive positions before the enemy is upon them, I do not see why they could not be used in regular battles. Of course that could be hard for you guys to implement as that would only work in a situation in which you had prior knowledge of an enemy position and had time to set them up before the enemy came within range. (which will be a hard thing to implement with a turn based campaign map)
Just my thoughts on the matter. :D

EDIT: Just saw those campaign map shots. Intrepid, I gotta say...man...your campaign map artists should be boiled in butter! :P The naval and land battles look positively beautiful, but the campaign map is a work of horror. I hope it is just a throw-together to show people, and not indicitave as to the final project. Sorry if I am too hard, but those arcade graphics scare me. I hope you understand

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Those shots are stills and not the final product.

What can't be seen is the richness of the terrain and the rippling oceans and lapping waves. Also the clouds scudding across the terrain and the trees slowly swaying in the breeze. Or any of the other animations and effects that are present.

[PBI]

Also the clouds scudding across the terrain and the trees slowly swaying in the breeze.

I wonder whether the weather effects visible on the campaign map will influence the likely conditions present in naval battles?

[Vuk]

Those shots are stills and not the final product.

What can't be seen is the richness of the terrain and the rippling oceans and lapping waves. Also the clouds scudding across the terrain and the trees slowly swaying in the breeze. Or any of the other animations and effects that are present.

I understand that Intrepid, and understand that you cannot really say more on the matter. I have no doubts that you guys will deliver fantastically on the special effects, but it is the general style that really turns me off. I may just be being picky, but it really seamed to cheapen the atmosphere and kill the mood to me. Esp the little 3rd buildings. Shots of cities on the battle map I saw seemed to have this same low-scale arcadish look. Kind of like not enough texture and too much colour. And the scale seemed very wrong too. You guys have always managed to put mindblowingly fantastic games out, and I have no doubt that you will this time, I am just getting a little scared now that the game is coming together. :P Could you tell me one thing though Intrepid? Is the whole bright colours/funny portraits/arcadish design/lack of texture/lack of scale thing a fill-in, or a design/style choice? I doubt it will effect gameplay very much, but I prefer the deeper, more realistic feel to games, so that is why I ask.

Thanks again,
Vuk

[Khazar_Dahvos]

regardless of what the final game looks like for the colors of buildings and such!!! You have my guarantee that it will be moddible and modded within the first 3 months of release. As long as the tools are available. So in reality it is one of the least concerns that I have for the game. The citys do look a bit to gaudy for my tastes. Looks abit like candyland

[Martok]

What can't be seen is the richness of the terrain and the rippling oceans and lapping waves. Also the clouds scudding across the terrain and the trees slowly swaying in the breeze.

Okay, even I have to admit that sounds pretty cool. Can't wait to see it in action.

Vis-a-vis the campaign map (on looking cartoonish/unrealistic): Again, how it looks doesn't matter as much to me, so long as it *works* well. Granted, I can understand some people's objections/concerns about the map looking somewhat cartoonish -- goodness knows I made the same complaints with Rome's -- but I've realized that I've become more concerned with function than form.

[Csargo]

Australia is a constitutional Monarchy, we have a constitution I guess?

I knew everyone would come around to my point of view with E:TW. It seems so long ago that I was the only person here thinking this would be good.

I think I was there too lurking in the corners.

[PBI]

I think I was there too lurking in the corners.

Yep, sign me up for one of pever's massive fanboy flags too please.

I admit I had my doubts during the period with no updates and delays to the release, but I have been excited about Empire ever since it was announced.