Family Tree

[knoddy]

to my knowledge there is no real family tree even in monarchies. i have never gotten any things telling me my king/queen had a son/daughter or anything to my knowledge if ur monarch dies a new one is just elected or perhaps it is assumed they had kids? more to the point its prob pretty rare neway i mean the game only spans 100 years so realistically u could go a whole game only having 2 leaders. ALSO most of the time if ur teching up u will have a revolution b4 anything happens to ur monarch.

in my marthras game i had the same queen till 1748 when i had a revolution and now im a republic. so /shrug.

the shortened time span doesnt really allow the development of families like in previous games where u could get a massive family tree by the end of Rome.

Cheers Knoddy

[antisocialmunky]

I got a message for a son being born in my Russian Game.

[crazyviking03]

Ive had a couple messages telling me an heir had been born. I am assuming it helps to avert a war of succesion

I also wonder if, for realism's sake, they have disabled the ability for a woman to assume the throne in France? It was established rather early in Midieval France that a woman would never be able to take the crown.

[Redemption]

Ive had a couple messages telling me an heir had been born. I am assuming it helps to avert a war of succesion

I also wonder if, for realism's sake, they have disabled the ability for a woman to assume the throne in France? It was established rather early in Midieval France that a woman would never be able to take the crown.

The "heir being born" event seems to have no effect on wars of succession. I've had plenty of wars of succession after having had the message.

And as France, I did get one female monarch, right after Louis XV. She was so bad I had to go through a series of Revolutions just to get another absolute monarch that was worth his salt.


And I do agree the game seems much less involving then previous TW titles. Generals and admirals are cookie cutter and don't seem to have a tremenduous effect on battles. There's no pre-battle speech. Monarchs or presidents are simply a picture with traits. It seems all the flavor has been removed from the game.

Course, it's still all fun and cannonballs on the battlefield, and the campaign map has seen a lot of improvement. But what's the point of having the Americas in the game if I can't bring Louis XIV himself to watch the Thirteen Colonies burn or prove to the world that Louis XVI was actually a bloodthirsty military genius!

[GeneralHankerchief]

And as France, I did get one female monarch, right after Louis XV. She was so bad I had to go through a series of Revolutions just to get another absolute monarch that was worth his salt.

Victoire I? Interesting, I had her at the same point and she was an excellent monarch, rivalling the Sun King himself. Certainly an improvement from Louis XV.

[antisocialmunky]

Its quite random it seems sadly. And I do agree that ETW does tone down alot of the RPing. However, in my Prussian Campaign, I do have an old beloved general that was the one to single handedly take down Poland, force the Russian to peace, and blitze Austria to Vienna.

He has like 10 command stars. But that's about it.

[Redemption]

Victoire I? Interesting, I had her at the same point and she was an excellent monarch, rivalling the Sun King himself. Certainly an improvement from Louis XV.

Actually she had a double name. But Louis XV and, surprisingly enough, Louis XVI were decent kings (4 stars, good traits and ancillaries). Louis XVII is a passable 3 stars monarch, though the ministers under him are 6 stars + so I don't mind that much.

In my 2 previous French campaign (one crashed around 1740, the other ended as a republic around the time of Louis XVI), Louis XVI has always been a 0 or 1 star dolt. So I guess there is a minimum of historicity with monarchs if you don't go changing the course of history with ill-placed revolutions.

[Megas Methuselah]

I reckon this is a step backward as I find I don't give a stuff about my Generals or other characters anymore. In previous TW games I got attached to them and enjoed the many quirky traits they could develop.

I completely agree. This practically kills a lot of RP potential that previous total war games had.

the shortened time span doesnt really allow the development of families like in previous games where u could get a massive family tree by the end of Rome.

Assuming that the number of family members isn't based on the amount of territory owned, I don't see much of a downside at all. Smaller families only mean you'll feel much stronger attachments towards each individual member. To this end, I wish we were able to use some of the minor royals as generals.

to my knowledge there is no real family tree even in monarchies. i have never gotten any things telling me my king/queen had a son/daughter or anything to my knowledge if ur monarch dies a new one is just elected or perhaps it is assumed they had kids?

I've gotten birth notifications before. I also had messages about mysterious people getting traits who weren't ministers, characters (priests, etc.), generals, or admirals.

ALSO most of the time if ur teching up u will have a revolution b4 anything happens to ur monarch.

I play my game in such as a way as to avoid some of the more severe enlightenment techs. I enjoy the power of being an absolute monarch. Even being a constitutional monarch ain't that bad.

However, you do have a good point. In a noble revolution, a new noble family would replace the old royal family, who could perhaps come back in their own noble revolt. However, in a republican revolt, the whole idea of family trees sort of dissapears.

[antisocialmunky]

My current Prussia is ruled by the late elector's wife.

[pevergreen]

There is a family tree, the UI button is just disabled.

[A Very Super Market]

Well, you can still RP things, but your characters will have less to do with each other. I mean, it isn't like your king would randomly decide to charge with his very fragile bodyguard.

[antisocialmunky]

Its too bad the Emperor isn't a character on the map. It would be pretty epic to RP a Napolean type Emperor-General. The sovereign is pretty much you in the end

[Warhammer3025]

I miss the pre battle speeches

[Aemilius Paulus]

I completely agree. This practically kills a lot of RP potential that previous total war games had.

Which is why I have not played ETW, despite having it, right on my computer. The campaign map was what I liked. My generals were the focus of the game. That is why I love Europa Barbarorum so much. There are over a thousand traits and levels of traits in that game. I also liked the RTW command, management, and influence.

The lack of this, and the piteous amount of traits M2TW had was my main reason for quitting it, after the bugs and cavalry imbalance. ETW is M2TW magnified. Even during its development, I dreaded the fact that ETW was unlikely to have a complex traits system. Now, it is reality.

I really, really hate ETW. Such potential... and wasted. All CA thought about was making the battles "cool". Battles are secondary to campaign map for me.

I miss the pre battle speeches

Yeah, CA took out all those small little things that made a big difference. Now, all we have is magnificent battles and nothing else. Now ETW is not much different from all those other tactical sims. And there are hundreds of those.

[Bob the Insane]

I do sympathize a little with CA here. By this point in history royal family trees in Europe had become very complex and interconnected. Members of the same Royal Household with Kings here, Queens there and Crown Princes somewhere else. It would be a complex undertaking to show this...

Further, unlike all the games that proceed it this one follows a nation not a family. Shogun, Medieval, Rome and Medieval 2 all have a family at the center of a faction. This has the higher idea of a Nation and the reality is that individuals, while important, do not define a nation nor does their loss destroy it. This makes the factions a lot less personal in nature.

Having said this, the fact is that these important individuals are not recorded in any way and that does detract from the game...

[pevergreen]

The fact is that the royal family isnt always there, and when it is, how many of them actually rode into battle?

Once again, please remove the comments about you having illegaly obtained this game.

I also liked the RTW command, management, and influence.

Improvements were made. CA have chosen the direction. Understandably, you may not like it. I disliked M2TW and its interface at first, but after understanding how it worked I found RTW clunky and hard to use. I could still use it, it just was not optimised.

[Warhammer3025]

Shoot just because most sovereigns didnt ride into battle doesnt mean we should exclude (and considering how barren of a personality our generals and admirals have we need leaders we can identity a nation with) them. Hell coulda made something simple like you can make your leader a domestic pansy or a Gustavus Adolphus reborn wannabe, i had a helluva lot of fun RPing my generals in M2:TW, i cheated in good and horrible personality traits to see the whole gamut of hilarious pre battle speeches.

Heck even the fmv took a major hit...