Some concerns about the campaign report

**Monk** · 02-19-2009, 12:21

The only concerns I still have about ETW come from the tactical side. Jack's campaign report really sold me on the strategic side, considering he was on Normal difficulty.

Unfortunately, I think most fans who have concerns about the tactical AI will not have their nagging doubts put to rest until they get their hands on the product itself. I know I'm in that boat, it's not a knock against the PR it's just that speculating on videos released hasn't gotten us anywhere.

**Kalle** · 02-19-2009, 12:42

Yes, the battles are what matters most to me aswell and especially and above all else the multiplayer ones. Please please make me happy with the whole mp-aspect.

Kalle

**Gaius Terentius Varro** · 02-19-2009, 13:02

My money is on that this game will be all fluff and no substance just like last 2 (4 if you count the exp.)

**Sol Invictus** · 02-19-2009, 16:28

I am fairly confident that the Strategic gameplay will be more solid than earlier games, but I am far less confident about the tactical gameplay. I just don't feel like the game will present battles that really feel like 18th century Linear warfare very well. We will see. The demo, if is is ever released, should answer many questions.

**NagatsukaShumi** · 02-19-2009, 16:36

To be honest, the fact that the strategy/campaign part looks to be fantastic is very exicting for me as building empires, getting my own memorable characters etc are what makes me get the most enjoyment from the game.

**tibilicus** · 02-19-2009, 16:46

Well it's not meant to be entirely historical is it?

How boring would it be just playing through historical events without getting the chance to do thinks your own way. For example maybe as Britain I don't want to be at war with France, maybe we could ally and destroy the world.

This is just speaking for me but I like a game that revolves around history, not one which forces me to play history.

**Husar** · 02-19-2009, 17:12

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Well it's not meant to be entirely historical is it?

How boring would it be just playing through historical events without getting the chance to do thinks your own way. For example maybe as Britain I don't want to be at war with France, maybe we could ally and destroy the world.

This is just speaking for me but I like a game that revolves around history, not one which forces me to play history.

I agree, too much history and I can just as well buy a movie.

player: "Oh, look, the battle of soandso, let's move that unit here...why doesn't it work?"
advisor: "Sorry, you cannot move that unit around the left flank as historically it moved around the right flank..."

**ByzanKing** · 02-19-2009, 18:09

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Well it's not meant to be entirely historical is it?

How boring would it be just playing through historical events without getting the chance to do thinks your own way. For example maybe as Britain I don't want to be at war with France, maybe we could ally and destroy the world.

This is just speaking for me but I like a game that revolves around history, not one which forces me to play history.

I totally agree with this point. How boring would it be if everything was scripted to happen the same as it did in real life. The replay to me would not be there if things always happened historically accurate. After all this is a game and we need to forge our own EMPIRES.

**Sol Invictus** · 02-19-2009, 17:15

Originally Posted by NagatsukaShumi

To be honest, the fact that the strategy/campaign part looks to be fantastic is very exicting for me as building empires, getting my own memorable characters etc are what makes me get the most enjoyment from the game.

Agreed, I am much more intererested in the Strategic gameplay than the battles and ETW sounds like the deepest TW game to date by far.