Getting around in Empire

**Polemists** · 01-21-2009, 08:17

Well my understanding may not be supberb.

However CA has stated in a interview, and I don't remeber which one. That generals will now not be as useful in combat as in previous games. They will die far easier, they are not as armored, etc.

Basically the idea, that generals are now just a normal unit of soldiers, not a uber unit of elite guards.

There was even a whole topic on these forums about how people were scared that now a few sharpshooters could just randomly kill a general and troops would route.

**Sir Beane** · 01-21-2009, 12:12

The idea now is that Generals will not be an unbeatable charging melee unit like they were in previous games. Especially with cavalry being much less effective in Empire.

Instead Generals will boost the combat ability of nearby men, as well as boosting their morale. They will act like a 'buff' class in an RPG. They are there to offer support to allies rather than to get into the thick of it themselves.

I expect Generals will still be harder to kill than a normal unit however, but probably not to the extent they were in Medieval 2 or Rome.

Basically we should be keeping our General close behind our line, protected by a wall of men, using his 'aura' to boost the morale of weak parts of the battle line.

**Polemists** · 01-21-2009, 12:27

I assume this will work similiar to the abilities of generals in Kingdoms.

While not one time use, I think the abilities will be things like, better aiming, better in a area, (infantry, Calvary, artillery), or maybe better discipline.

The general will probably not be one shot kill, but I doubt he's going to be able to solo entire units either, if he gets in the thick of it, he's toast with probably a few shots or one cannon shot. Unlike the barrage of arrows you could let hit your general's unit in MTW and RTW again and again

**Sir Beane** · 01-21-2009, 13:00

Originally Posted by Polemists

I assume this will work similiar to the abilities of generals in Kingdoms.

While not one time use, I think the abilities will be things like, better aiming, better in a area, (infantry, Calvary, artillery), or maybe better discipline.

The general will probably not be one shot kill, but I doubt he's going to be able to solo entire units either, if he gets in the thick of it, he's toast with probably a few shots or one cannon shot. Unlike the barrage of arrows you could let hit your general's unit in MTW and RTW again and again

This sounds like a fair interpretation. I wouldn't mind seeing some Kindoms-esque general abilities in ETW, providing that they were balanced, and made snese within the context of the battle.

It would be nice if the generals speech did something other than offer amusing listening. A great speech could shore up your men's morale, and a poor speech could make them even more depressed and likely to rout.

Keeping your general alive may become quite a problem in this era. After all virtually every man on the field is carrying some form of ranged weapon, we have super mobile horse atillery, super mobile dragoon infantry, and possibly even long range snipers. He could end up as the target for hundreds of guns. Especially in multiplayer.

I wonder how effective bullets will be. I think I remember someone here working out that in Medieval 2 it can take on average several hundred arrows to down an enemy unit. Will bullets be as ineffectve as arrows were? It's this sort of question that really requires a demo and gameplay experience to answer.

**Fisherking** · 01-21-2009, 13:11

Originally Posted by Sir Beane

I wonder how effective bullets will be. I think I remember someone here working out that in Medieval 2 it can take on average several hundred arrows to down an enemy unit. Will bullets be as ineffectve as arrows were? It's this sort of question that really requires a demo and gameplay experience to answer.

They said they are using an actual physical model so I would guess if troops are in front of a bullet it just might hurt.

**Fondor_Yards** · 01-21-2009, 21:41

Ah I thought you meant they weren't in the battles at all anymore, my bad Polemists.

Hopefully they will do it like NTW2 did it. Super tiny bodyguard *like 10 men* but their ralley ability and the fact they gave them the eagle thing *boosts all nearby unit's morale and lowers enemy's iirc* made them very important in making sure your units didn't rout in combat. If he died, it became rather easy to route the enemy by sheer musket fire.

**ConnMon** · 01-23-2009, 01:45

Originally Posted by Fisherking

They said they are using an actual physical model so I would guess if troops are in front of a bullet it just might hurt.

I think bullets with do a lot more than arrows because, although not terribly accurate, they could do more damage than arrows could. If not, I'll probably end up bayonet charging a lot

**Sir Beane** · 01-23-2009, 01:57

Originally Posted by ConnMon

I think bullets with do a lot more than arrows because, although not terribly accurate, they could do more damage than arrows could. If not, I'll probably end up bayonet charging a lot

Bullets from an early musket weren't much more deadly than an arrow. In fact an archer may have been more dangerous than a musketeer, as a well trained archer tended to be more accurate.

From close range you are just as dead whether an arrow or a musket ball hits you.

Bayonet charges are more fun anyway.