FYI - GamesRadar.com hands on preview

[Intrepid Sidekick]

http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/empire-...22164625990074

Games Radar article.

[pevergreen]

Hands on? I wish I had one. grrrr.

edit: From the playtime the reviewer got, it seems like just more confirmed goodness. Auto-attack, and timed etc. Realistic boarding is something I hadn't thought of. Will love to do that in Multiplayer, throw some hooks up and attempt to board a better ship.

@CA Staff: Is there a feature to upgrade ships towards a certain thing, such as boarding/firing/moving etc?

[Matt_Lane]

Something interesting I noticed in the review was that one of the pictures had a sail assisted paddle steamer. I didn't think that these were available as warships in the time period and if so this is the first evidence I've seen of CA's commitment to allow the player to twist history a little and develop technology early than it appeared in reality. It makes me wonder what other inventions we are likely to see sooner than their historical context.

[Mailman653]

Something interesting I noticed in the review was that one of the pictures had a sail assisted paddle steamer. I didn't think that these were available as warships in the time period and if so this is the first evidence I've seen of CA's commitment to allow the player to twist history a little and develop technology early than it appeared in reality. It makes me wonder what other inventions we are likely to see sooner than their historical context.

The steamer is not totally new, it's been mentioned in other threads and I believe it's been stated that if you invest heavily in technology you can develop things way ahead of their time.

Nice article.

[Martok]

Thanks for the heads-up, Intrepid Sidekick. Much appreciated.



Wow, there's a lot of quotable goodness in this article! Among the things that interested me:

In an improvement to the grouping systems of previous games, ships can be set not only to group, but to maintain a formation in group.

Cool. I suspect we'll need those functions.

It brings to mind Sid Meier’s Pirates! as a strategy game, but with much more realism: the primary goal is to line up as many of your cannons as possible to fire at the right moment. While automatic firing and circling options allow you simply to set a target and step back as your ships engage, you can choose to get more hands-on, such as turning off autofire to unleash a storm of cannonballs at the perfect moment.

Am very glad to see this! As a newbie admiral, it'll be nice to be able to automate at least basic functions.

This time around, three coders focus on AI full-time, with others contributing. “We can always say that we’re working really hard on the AI - which we are - and that we think it’s going to be better than before - which we do - but the objective fact is that compared with Rome, we have a lot more staff on it,” says James Russell.

If defeat is immaterial, they’ll maximize casualties against the opposition, then retreat. If they simply must triumph in this battle in order to win the war, expect a to-the-last-man encounter.

“One of the first things Richard [Bull, lead battle AI programmer] did was to look at some of the exploit tactics people used in our previous games and say, ‘I’m going to make sure none of them work anymore,’” says Mark Sutherns. The period itself already minimizes some of this - camping a corner is less effective when it makes you a perfect target for cannon fire.

Outstanding! While I'm still somewhat skeptical, it does give me hope that maybe, just maybe, Empire will have the best AI since Shogun (and perhaps even better? oh to dream!).

I'll be especially impressed if the AI is improved to the point that it's no longer easy to draw it away from strong defensive positions -- I've fought too many bridge battles where I was able to trick my opponent into attacking me.

Similar innovations in government include democracies that swap their cabinet members with a shadow cabinet as their popularity wanes. These ministers replace the governors of individual regions - though there are still theater-wide-governors - and give bonuses in different areas. Since the shadow government has different strengths from the elected officials, you’ll find yourself in the novel situation of deliberately getting your government booted in order to seat people in power who are more suitable for your current predicament.

These sorts of political power games strongly tie into revolutions. They can be prompted for all sorts of reasons, and doing so gives you the option of choosing to fight for the status quo or for the would-be status quo - if you want to run a Republic, you may need to play to alienate your people to begin with. Or, you can play more considerately, spending your research resources on the sorts of enlightened strides in thinking that characterized the age. Of course, this will give the lower classes funny ideas about “rights." In Empire, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing to the established order. Creative Assembly promises a true research tech-tree for the first time in a Total War game, along with upper and lower social classes that are clearly modeled separately.

Ah, all sorts of juicy political stuff here. I can't wait to see what happens the first time I have a revolution on my hands (regardless of whether I deliberately triggered it or not).

It’s telling that this, rather than the simple conquest method of winning an empire, is the basis for Empire’s concept of “prestige,” and whoever has the most - gained via research, economic power, and military victories in the year 1800 is declared the winner.

I know this has been mentioned before, but I still can't reiterate enough how awesome it is. Being able to win the game without necessarily having to conquer huge swaths of territory should be a massive improvement!

Quick question, though: Is the year 1800 a typo? I thought the game didn't end until 1820.



A couple things which I admit I found to of concern and/or confusing:

Another area where total realism took a hit: tacking (i.e., zig-zagging your ship) to move into the wind, which isn’t as simple as just sailing at an angle. “It sounds like a good idea,” Ferguson says, “but what it means is that if you click somewhere, the ship goes off in a completely different direction." After attempting to make the mechanic mandatory, the team eventually chose to make things simpler: Wind greatly affects a battle in terms of the ships’ speed and direction - a “North Sea in winter” battle will be fought at least as much against the elements as against your opponents - but tacking won’t ever be necessary. Instead, those who choose to give it a whirl will be rewarded with a speed bonus.

A bit of a bummer that tacking didn't make it into the game. I understand the reasons, but it it's still a little disappointing.

What I don't quite get, though, is the afore-mentioned speed bonus: Is there any reason *not* to tack into the wind then? Or is there some sort of drawback (or at least potential drawback) to doing so?

Then there are the trade theaters - such as the Caribbean, East Africa, and the East Indies - to which you’re unable to send land forces, and so must dominate by naval power alone.

So does this mean we can't station troops on the islands in the Caribbean and East Indies? That seems a little odd to me. (And here I was looking forward to being able to garrison Port Royal with British soldiers and fight off the Black Pearl French & Spanish raiders! )



Still, all in all, a most excellent preview. Now if we can only find out what kind of copy protection ETW will have....

[Jack Lusted]

What I don't quite get, though, is the afore-mentioned speed bonus: Is there any reason *not* to tack into the wind then? Or is there some sort of drawback (or at least potential drawback) to doing so?

The speed bonus is really what you get from donig tacking, if you move your ships in a tacking way up wind you'll see them move faster than just sailing upwind. However we've not made tacking necessary.

So does this mean we can't station troops on the islands in the Caribbean and East Indies?

You can in the Caribbean, the article has that wrong. There is instead a different trade theatre in that part of the map.

[Sheogorath]

Are those 15-line deep firing formations still going to be in the final game? They do look kind of silly, to me, at least.

[Martok]

The speed bonus is really what you get from donig tacking, if you move your ships in a tacking way up wind you'll see them move faster than just sailing upwind. However we've not made tacking necessary.



You can in the Caribbean, the article has that wrong. There is instead a different trade theatre in that part of the map.

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up Lusted.

[Jack Lusted]

Are those 15-line deep firing formations still going to be in the final game? They do look kind of silly, to me, at least.

Well check out the land battle trailer released today for some nice footage of line infantry in 3 deep lines.

[Zenicetus]

The speed bonus is really what you get from donig tacking, if you move your ships in a tacking way up wind you'll see them move faster than just sailing upwind. However we've not made tacking necessary.

This is what I've been afraid of, all along. Square riggers sailing directly upwind? You've got to be kidding us! That will be an arcade game with pretty graphics, not a representation of sail combat during the historic period.

You expect gamers to be sophisticated enough to appreciate flanking tactics and the use of cavalry in land combat, but you think they're unable to grasp the concept of tacking in sail combat? Or is that CA just couldn't develop an AI that could handle it? Other game developers have managed it. This might as well have been a WW1 game with propeller-driven ships, if you're going to disregard the way sailing ships actually move on the water!

Bah, humbug.

This is very disappointing, but maybe I'm the only one bothered by this. I'll definitely have to read a bunch of user reports after the game is released, before I think about buying it. I'm not that interested in gunpowder combat, and naval combat was the big selling point for me. Until now.

[PBI]

Land battle trailer? Where?

[Jack Lusted]

You expect gamers to be sophisticated enough to appreciate flanking tactics and the use of cavalry in land combat, but you think they're unable to grasp the concept of tacking in sail combat?

Oh I'm sure they could, it's just that we felt battles are better without forcing the player to spend ages tacking up wind just to be able to engage.

Or is that CA just couldn't develop an AI that could handle it?

No the AI can and does tack if it's required. Remember, just because we've not made tacking required doesn't mean that if you choose to tack you'll see benefits.

This might as well have been a WW1 game with propeller-driven ships, if you're going to disregard the way sailing ships actually move on the water!

Ships do move at different speeds relating to the wind direction(and in fact sail fastest with wind slightly off one beam instead of directly behind them) so it's a very realistic sailing model, the only thing we've really changed is ships sailing into the wind.

Land battle trailer? Where?

http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/38082

[Zenicetus]

Ships do move at different speeds relating to the wind direction(and in fact sail fastest with wind slightly off one beam instead of directly behind them) so it's a very realistic sailing model, the only thing we've really changed is ships sailing into the wind.

Right, that also means that you've changed the ability to recreate classic sail-era sea battles the way they actually happened, with the limitations and challenges that were involved at the time. A naval combat engine where ships can sail directly upwind (especially in a square-rigged ship!!) is an arcade game, one that isn't worthy of the previous attempts at historical accuracy in Total War games, in my opinion.

[Megas Methuselah]

Let's see you do any better. Whining like how you do is not at all helpful. If you have any suggestions, it's best to at least keep it as constructive criticism.

[hoom]

To me the important question is how much of an advantage you get from tacking.

If you take two identical vessels sailing from point A to point B which is directly upwind, the ship tacking needs to get to point B well ahead of the one going straight upwind.

The ship sailing straight into the wind needs significant maneuvrability restriction too.

AI tacking is a good thing, don't like the idea of a stupid AI sailing straight upwind at me all the time. I probably won't mind it occasionally though.

[Zenicetus]

Methuselah, I've been trying to keep my criticism constructive about the sailing issue for months. Read my earlier posts. I've tried to point out how wind direction is the equivalent of the use of terrain in land battles. Without it, it's less of a game for those who care about realistic use of tactics. Some of us care about these things, others don't. That's fine. If CA doesn't want to make the kind of game that people who understand and love sail combat would like to play, that's their decision and we just won't buy it. Simple.

[Husar]

I would actually find realistic sailing pretty boring, I wouldn't want to see some stupid AI try to escape upwind and then give every single of my 20 ships zigzag waypoints to follow them, then wait for hours until they have reached the end of the sea-map.

Realistic or not, this is something I can simply overlook for the sake of gameplay.

[Martok]

Easy, folks. Please keep the discussion civil.

Ideally, I'd love for my ships to be able to tack as they would've in real life. Unfortunately, though, CA does sometimes have to make a choice between realism/historical accuracy and gameplay. Such is the nature of making almost any game (and *especially* a historical-themed strategy game); occasionally something has to give.

CA has been doing this long enough that by now they know which way they want to go when it comes to realism-vs.-gameplay issues. If eliminating tacking is necessary to keeping the naval battles fun, then so be it. I'll miss it, no doubt, but not to the point where it'll cause me to stop enjoying the game.


Just give me a decent AI, a robust political/diplomatic system, and I'll be happy as a clam in mud.

[Mount Suribachi]

Interesting read, although the fact that author (Kieron Gillen) and one of the CA employees mentioned in the article (Ian Roxborough) used to work together at PC Gamer UK back in the day does make me take it with a pinch of salt. Although to be fair Gillen has been a long-time fan of the TW series (I am the king of Spain!)

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Hello peeps

Nowhere has anything said by CA that tacking is not a valid thing to do.
In fact anyone smart enough and willing to spend the time tacking will gain a distinct advantage by doing so. i.e. They will get to their destination quicker.

We did a fair amount of gameplay testing to get to the model we have.

A very common problem we discovered with an entirely realisitic model of sailing was that less informed players, i.e. those with no knowledge of sailing, could not understand why their ships would start heading off in a different direction when they gave them an order to go a point directly in to the wind e.g heading north east to get to a point just 500 meters north west. Even with route indicators and a simple advisor explanation it just went above their heads.

So to make it simple enough to understand we just allowed ships to sail extremely slowly in to the wind if ordered by the player. Tacking is still your best method but you arent left "stuck" if you dont understand the finer points of sailing. NB We also experimented with taking-a-back ships, (in order to clearly show that the player was sailing in to the wind) that turned in to the wind but that really confused people: "Why is my ship moving backwards when I gave it an order to move forwards?".

Please consider that we are making a fun game for a very large market not just for informed sailing enthusiasts.

If you are willing to give Empire's naval battles a chance you will discover that different ships have different speeds in different wind conditions and at different points to the wind. Damage to rigging, sails and crew all effect the ships ability to respond to your orders and to their speed and movement. If you tack then you gain an adavantage over those that dont tack. Most importantly you will see that it is fun to play. As we have always said since day one of making Total War games. If there is a decision to be made between fun gameplay and realism, gameplay wins - every time.

[Ituralde]

Thanks for that very detailed explanation of the development process!
I think it's very good to hear that the engine supports very realistic sailing conditions, so for those who really want to have a 100% accurate sail simulation it could be modded in.

I'm still a bit baffled by the whole thing however. So in Scenario A you click on a point straight north, where the wind is coming from, and your ship would start tacking NW, NE and so on. This was too confusing, because the ship didn't go north. Along comes Scenario B where you click on a point straight north, where the wind is coming from, and your ship sails slooowly north. But if you take the time to manually tack you get there faster.

Is it me or does that sound like a pain in the ass? In Scenario A you could just click and the game would do the tacking for you and in Scenario B you now have to do it manually. I hope somewhere is the advanced option of Auto-Tacking, meaning that your ships will try to get from point A to B on the fastest not the shortest route. Also what about the AI? Will it use tacking or just sail slooowly?

All in all a fascinating example of Realism vs. Usabilty!

[Husar]

Optional auto-tacking, now that sounds like a good idea to me!

[rajpoot]

Thank you, Jack and Intrepid, answers are much appriciated.
And I must say, Empire is looking good, pretty good. All you guys at CA are doing a great job

[CBR]

As we have always said since day one of making Total War games. If there is a decision to be made between fun gameplay and realism, gameplay wins - every time.

And what is wrong with a challenging gameplay? I have encountered players who could not understand nor liked the concept of morale. They either had to learn it or use the option for Arcade gameplay. Why not do the same for naval combat in ETW?


CBR

[Zenicetus]

Thanks for that very detailed explanation of the development process!
I think it's very good to hear that the engine supports very realistic sailing conditions, so for those who really want to have a 100% accurate sail simulation it could be modded in.

Not sure that's possible. Even if there is a parameter for "speed when sailing directly upwind" that could be modded to zero, will the AI be able to cope with that? Or will it just sit with ships dead in the water (or sliding slightly backwards), because it doesn't know that sailing directly upwind is forbidden, across a fairly wide angle of possible directions? As always with any mod, the big question is whether the AI can handle the changes, when the game hasn't been designed with that original intent.

I'm still a bit baffled by the whole thing however. So in Scenario A you click on a point straight north, where the wind is coming from, and your ship would start tacking NW, NE and so on. This was too confusing, because the ship didn't go north. Along comes Scenario B where you click on a point straight north, where the wind is coming from, and your ship sails slooowly north. But if you take the time to manually tack you get there faster.

Is it me or does that sound like a pain in the ass? In Scenario A you could just click and the game would do the tacking for you and in Scenario B you now have to do it manually. I hope somewhere is the advanced option of Auto-Tacking, meaning that your ships will try to get from point A to B on the fastest not the shortest route.

Yeah, unless by "doing it manually" CA means there's an auto-tacking feature. Remember though, that tacking isn't only about optimizing tack angles for the most efficient travel from point A to point B. Tacking is also about placing your ship beam-on to the enemy, so you can fire (and avoiding being caught with your bow or stern to the enemy's broadside). Both functions are considered together, once you're in firing range, which is really the only thing that makes sail combat different from WW1 dreadnaughts maneuvering in battle.

Tactics change completely when there is a direction where you literally can't go, no matter how hard you try. Allowing ships to move slowly in that forbidden direction, even if "very slowly," makes it a different kind of game. Unlike land combat, naval combat is a vast open field with only a single tactical challenge -- how to work with the wind, and force the enemy into an unfavorable position relative to the wind direction. I would think players would enjoy that challenge (assuming the AI is a worthy opponent).

Also what about the AI? Will it use tacking or just sail slooowly?

Good question. If the player doesn't try to understand what tacking is all about, won't he/she be confused if the AI's ships are always sailing for best speed advantage and tacking upwind? And if the AI never tacks, then isn't tacking a player exploit?

All in all a fascinating example of Realism vs. Usabilty!

There is always that balance to consider in a game. I've said before here that I don't think it would be fun at all, to have to deal with every tiny detail in the management of a sailing ship. Especially one as insanely complicated as a full-rigged ship of the line. You'd go nuts trying to determine how much sail to put on, and how to set the yards for every course change. But the bare basics of sailing aren't rocket science. Realistic, or even semi-realistic sailing has been done before in computer games, while still being fun. Even the somewhat cartoonish 2nd version of Sid Meir's "Pirates!" wouldn't let your ship sail directly upwind. That game respected the "forbidden zone" so you felt like the ships were actually sailing instead of being powerboats. I don't remember anyone complaining about that game being too hard.

[Ituralde]

I don't remember it exactly but couldn't you sail really sloow against the wind too in Pirates! ? I remember it was a major disadvantage and quite hard to get out of once you started it, but it wasn't completely off-limits. Either way, in Pirates! you only maneuvered one ship at a time. I'm really looking forward to test the naval battles and see how they go, commanding 20 ships and such.

Oh and I agree with your other points. Right now I'd really have to see it/play it to say anything more about it.

[pevergreen]

The problem is, as CA have said, they have to cater for everyone.

If I was handed the naval combat part of ETW, I would eventually figure out which way the wind was going, but then i'd have no idea of how to go that way, apart from sailing directly to a point.

If a wind is going south, to me that means you cant go north. Or anything like north. Because the wind would just push you back. Also, as CA have said, gameplay > realism when they clash.

edit: I can imagine you as one of the people annoyed about RTW allowing unlimited fatigue and missiles, saying that makes all Horse Archers imbalanced. (which it does, but complaining about something that can most likely be changed doesnt help)

[Zenicetus]

The problem is, as CA have said, they have to cater for everyone.

If I was handed the naval combat part of ETW, I would eventually figure out which way the wind was going, but then i'd have no idea of how to go that way, apart from sailing directly to a point.

If a wind is going south, to me that means you cant go north. Or anything like north. Because the wind would just push you back. Also, as CA have said, gameplay > realism when they clash.

As a historical strategy gamer, how long did it take you to learn about protecting the flanks of your battle line, or the use of archers, or the proper use of cavalry? How to lay seige to a castle, or defend against a seige? How to use horse archers?

None of that is intuitive, for gamers living in the 21st Century. Isn't learning about how to use these battle tactics, which have nothing at all to do with modern warfare, part of the fun with games like this?

Sailing isn't rocket science. Really, it's not that hard to figure out, and it's the only available tactic when you're fighting on the high seas without the use of engines. It's been done before, in other games. If square rigged ships can sail directly upwind, you will learn absolutely nothing about how naval combat worked in this historical period.

edit: I can imagine you as one of the people annoyed about RTW allowing unlimited fatigue and missiles, saying that makes all Horse Archers imbalanced. (which it does, but complaining about something that can most likely be changed doesnt help)

If the sailing mechanic of sailing directly upwind can be modded, and if the AI can deal with that, then I withdraw all objections. Until that's confirmed, I'll remain a skeptic.

[AussieGiant]

I think it's a fairly sensible approach.

While not realistic, there is going to be a clear advantage of "knowing" about tacking and wind direction. That in itself will give you a tactical benefit. If you don't learn about it, then you will be constantly at a disadvantage.

In the end I expect most players to use "sailing" directly into the wind as a "choice of last resort".

It should be a non factor in many respects the more I think about it.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Similar enhancements are seen in the diplomacy between governments, as you’re capable of offering a much greater variety of deals. There’s also increased transparency of an opposing nation’s feelings, so you should no longer be surprised by allies who become foes over something you didn’t realize they were touchy about - like, say, invasions.

That's good to hear! So we can get the "Get out of my land" option finally?
Better diplomacy was one of the things I really hoped that E:TW introduces.
Have to say that I'm more happy to get better diplomacy/campaign map AI than naval battles.
I'll probably going to try some naval battles at first but later just build the best ships and autocalc the naval battles.
Anyway, nice article!