Number of turns?

[Martok]

Out of curiosity, how many turns (ideally speaking) would you like to see Empire have?


Personally, I'd still prefer to return to four turns per year (ala Shogun), as I feel that 200 turns isn't going to be nearly enough time for me. However, I'm also a big-time turtler, and I know that some players are more aggressive than myself. I'm curious to know what you guys think.

[Fisherking]

I voted four but you know I could do 12 no problem. That would just be a long, long game if you had to play to the bitter end.

[Wishazu]

I voted 4 as like Martok I am also a big-time turtler. Aswel as increasing the overall length of the campaign 4 turns per year would make the game follow seasonal changes which could affect certain decisions you have to make - Do I send a fleet across the stormy Atlantic in winter and risk losing my ships or do let my colonies fall to the French...

[Fisherking]

I said it elsewhere but I think four is minimum for weather at sea IMO. They haven’t seen it that way though.

12 turns would give you much better detail but it would make for a long game as I said.

I have a distinct impression, regardless of what the victory conditions are that you will be hard put to accomplish what may have been done historically.

[Megas Methuselah]

I, also, love to turtle. Although I will expand, it will be over a long period of time and well within reasonable bounds (i.e. not a Napoleon blitz). I love working together with the AI, maintain vassals, and just play it like a political tutorial, not a game.

4 turns. 200 turns is not enough. Hopefully we'll have the option to continue playing past the end date even if we handn't met the victory conditions...

[Dradem]

I would say 6 but it's not on there Martok could you ad it?

Reason why is 12 would be to much altough it will give a bigger impact in the game, they could even make it so that certain months would have heavier snow or colder etc.

4 would give you just the seasons, and is defintly better then 2 . But then you could say Oh it's december I'wont invade Russia because it's winter a bit to predicatable I think.

That's why I'ld say 6, you could have a winter peak already November, December but less in Jan and Feb. Just to give a example. Or droughts in certain summer months that would give bad crops or shortage of water for troops, and people. and just troop movement will be even more realistic.
It will be less of on impact for a to long gameplay then 12.

But I will be already a realy happy camper with 4

[Polemists]

I'd like to see more turns, but inevitably every game seems to have less turns then the last one (or maybe that's jus thow I feel)

4 sounds good cause of seasons. Yes you would have the inevitable, mass attacks in spring and lack of attacks in Winter, but there could still be some surprises.

Though as this game is done, and heading out the door I think this pool is a mute point...maybe in the expansion.

[lenin96]

Someone in another thread said that there would only be 2 turns a year, i hope its 4 or 6, but people can mod it anyway.

[Joker II]

I'd like to see four, this in combination with having the opportunity to see what the weather will be like on the campaign map when going into the battlemap.

This way, you know what you can expect from the weather conditions before you enter a battle which could lead to fighting or not, what units to use etc...

Would add alot towards gameplay imho.

[Polemists]

Someone in another thread said that there would only be 2 turns a year, i hope its 4 or 6, but people can mod it anyway.

As someone mentioned in another thread. I'm sure someone will mod it, however I personally just prefer the original material.

I save mods for like....crazy stuff...which I can't think of right now....

[Pinxit]

As someone mentioned in another thread. I'm sure someone will mod it, however I personally just prefer the original material.

I save mods for like....crazy stuff...which I can't think of right now....

If it is 2 turns per year... that means that 6 months pass between turns. That would be unplayable, right? Since a ship for example, and an army travelling by horse, would be able to go pretty much anywhere in that time.

How did it work in Rome and Medieval?

[Sir Beane]

I too am a turtle, snd therefore highly evolved and adapted to deal with four turns a year

I want tos see seasons! That way we could have accurate seasonal weather. Rainy in Spring, sunny in Summer, etc.. It would also be nice to see Autumn leaves on the campaign map, as well as Winter snow drifts.

Personally though I really have no problem with even more turns per year, up to around twelve. I play the game for long term vaalue, I hate short campaigns. Even though I could steamroll the map after building up for a bit I never do, mostly because I just can't have fun with that.

From the perspective of roleplay, and 'putting yourself in the game' four turns is ideal.

[andrewt]

2. I'd love to see all 4 seasons but if they did that, I might not see later tech units if only time unlocks them. I just can't play a ton of turns doing nothing but defending and killing brigands. It would bore me to death. Brigands, especially, are usually what persuade me to pick-up another game after playing some Total War.

[Megas Methuselah]

How did it work in Rome and Medieval?

Ugh. Rome had two turns per year, and Medieval 2 had two years per turn. The best approach to these was, "Don't think about it."

I want tos see seasons! That way we could have accurate seasonal weather. Rainy in Spring, sunny in Summer, etc.. It would also be nice to see Autumn leaves on the campaign map, as well as Winter snow drifts.

Personally though I really have no problem with even more turns per year, up to around twelve. I play the game for long term vaalue, I hate short campaigns. Even though I could steamroll the map after building up for a bit I never do, mostly because I just can't have fun with that.

From the perspective of roleplay, and 'putting yourself in the game' four turns is ideal.

A big, bold YES to everything written here.

[Rick]

Why wouldn't the game come with the option of choosing yearly, seasonally, or monthly turns. A player should have that option.

[TevashSzat]

Why wouldn't the game come with the option of choosing yearly, seasonally, or monthly turns. A player should have that option.

Well, then game balance would be off. Think about it, more turns means lower army movement and tax income and longer build times. Else, it might only pass for 5 in game years, but you conquered half the world already

[Polemists]

I do see the need not to mainstream it. Aka: Don't make the game just 4 turns per year. Yes you are right that would upset the people who like to rush and feel like time is against them.


However, Rick had the right idea, if there was a option to choose turns to be seasonal, montly, or bi yearly I think everyone would get what they want.

Would it be that hard for CA to implement? If a building took 2 years, and you choose seasonal, then yes it now takes 24 turns to complete. Then again some people just like looking at the map, relaxing , and sending out agents and doing little things, rather then big sweeping conquests.

[Martok]

Hopefully we'll have the option to continue playing past the end date even if we handn't met the victory conditions...

I believe we will be able to, yes. However, there will be no more in-game events after 1800.

[BeeSting]

Four turns per year for me.

[gollum]

Hi,
4 per year for me too, they'll never do it though, and perhaps rightly; the game is now huge in scope and abstraction than the Feudal Japan scenario, that had the harvest and seasonal weather. It will be very detailed f they did it that way and very hard to even deliver vanilla campaign balance.

The way things are 2 per year is the best middle ground.

Anyway, after BI they aim generally at about 200 - 250 turns limit, which is again a middle ground between SP hardcores that roleplay their characters as if they were alive in real time and the said casual gamer that serves as the TW compass eversince RTW.

!it burnsus!

[General SupaCrunk]

4 Turns

[Thermal]

6, but said 12 cause it wasnt there, if a hundred year perios that would be 600 turns, and i like to go slow-ish myslef, my dad wouldnt finish if there were 100000 turns though, he takes one settlement every 50 turns

[Roka]

I do see the need not to mainstream it. Aka: Don't make the game just 4 turns per year. Yes you are right that would upset the people who like to rush and feel like time is against them.


However, Rick had the right idea, if there was a option to choose turns to be seasonal, montly, or bi yearly I think everyone would get what they want.

Would it be that hard for CA to implement? If a building took 2 years, and you choose seasonal, then yes it now takes 24 turns to complete. Then again some people just like looking at the map, relaxing , and sending out agents and doing little things, rather then big sweeping conquests.

I think someone has miscalculated

[Lord Nelson]

While I never played shogun, I Would be happy with either 12 or four. But for me it all depends on how long it takes to build stuff and how movement cost will work. As long as its all balanced out, and it doesnt take 6 years to get to the Americas.(I was being sarcastic before you all jump in screaming your history facts) For me ,when I played Medieval, the worst feeling was that of feeling rushed, knowing that I only had a short time. And the sluggish movement of troops.

I personally feel they should increase the momvemt rate. This would help to keep the game moving,

On a side note: I would like to apologise to anybody I may have offended during my previous posts. I Should not have reacted the way I did. I was wrong to critisize CA and to break the rules so openly.

[Sir Beane]

While I never played shogun, I Would be happy with either 12 or four. But for me it all depends on how long it takes to build stuff and how movement cost will work. As long as its all balanced out, and it doesnt take 6 years to get to the Americas.(I was being sarcastic before you all jump in screaming your history facts) For me ,when I played Medieval, the worst feeling was that of feeling rushed, knowing that I only had a short time. And the sluggish movement of troops.

I personally feel they should increase the momvemt rate. This would help to keep the game moving,

On a side note: I would like to apologise to anybody I may have offended during my previous posts. I Should not have reacted the way I did. I was wrong to critisize CA and to break the rules so openly.

Hey, no problem! An apology is enough for me to forgive you. Also don't worry about critiscising CA, we all do it :P We just tend to be a little nicer about it (some of us anyway).

I also hated the feeling of being rushed that was around in Medieval 2. I like to have a lot of time to build up a nice infrastructure and military force before I begin my invasions. Recent Total War games have favoured a much more blitz-happy style (just look at Askthepizzaguy, though he would probably blitz even if the game favoured turtles.)

[YouHaveRecieved]

I would love to see an eight years per turn campaign. I'm sure the. 'Fight for Independace' or whatever tutorial will have more turns per years because it happened over a shorter scale. Eight turns would give two turns a season and more variety to seasons.

[Megas Methuselah]

With eight years, though, time will pass ridiculously slow... And people will, as previously stated, conquer the world in a matter of a few years.

[YouHaveRecieved]

Well, I believe we are obviously not going to get 4/6/8/12 turns per year are we? I'm saying in my ideal world eight would be perfect.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

With eight years, though, time will pass ridiculously slow... And people will, as previously stated, conquer the world in a matter of a few years.

If the new AI is as good as CA wants us to think then I doubt it.

And.. I voted for 4 turns per year. If I get seasons then I'm happy.
The perfect solution is off course if we could choose between fast paced game with 2tpy and some lower paced games with 4tpy(or even 12 tpy).

[YouHaveRecieved]

People would, but I wouldn't. A lot of people would build up slowly or over time, in an ideal world there would be a choice, with unit recruitment and build times changed with each. I would say 2/4/8/12 tpy options.