Broken Promises

[Tully Bascombe]

This game was originally advertized as extending from 1700 to 1830. I just bought the thing, hoping to play a little Napoleonics. Much to my surprise none of the campaigns extend past 1799. I'm very, very, very disappointed. How could they do this?

[A Very Super Market]

When did they say that?

Besides which, they announced the change pre-release by quite a bit. Don't know why you're complaining

[NimitsTexan]

You can continue the campaign indefinately, if you choose. And the end of the tech tree is definately 1815-1830 era technology.

[pevergreen]

They game was originally going to be 1700-1820. Check the first summary thread for that.

But they changed it. If you had been following the pre release, or read anything about the game afterwards, chances are you would have realised.



Theres always expansions and mods anyway.

[MikeV]

How could they do this?

Well, because they are the Creators.

Besides, it gives them a chance to publish Napoleon:Total War, and get a new batch of $$$ from us Beta testers ...

[Tully Bascombe]

Well, because they are the Creators.

Besides, it gives them a chance to publish Napoleon:Total War, and get a new batch of $$$ from us Beta testers ...

Even if they had fulfilled their original promises they still would have had the chance to release expansion packs for the Musket and Pike era (1500 to 1700), and for the Victorian era (1830 to 1914).

[Hooahguy]

so, what other things did CA promise but not deliver? please tell.

[Meneldil]

Even if they had fulfilled their original promises they still would have had the chance to release expansion packs for the Musket and Pike era (1500 to 1700), and for the Victorian era (1830 to 1914).

Napoleon > Pike & Musket and Victoria on marketing basis.

[Aemilius Paulus]

so, what other things did CA promise but not deliver? please tell.

Everything. They delivered a piece-of-crap ETW. I had the full version of ETW on my computer since the release date, and I have not even opened it once. Good thing I did not pay for the game. What a waste of money it would have been.

[Husar]

Everything. They delivered a piece-of-crap ETW. I had the full version of ETW on my computer since the release date, and I have not even opened it once. Good thing I did not pay for the game. What a waste of money it would have been.

That tells me a lot more about you, than the game... are you really saying you didn't even try it, yet you think to know it's bad?

[Tully Bascombe]

Napoleon > Pike & Musket and Victoria on marketing basis.

I guess what I'm saying is that per my preferences Napoleon Total War > American Revolution Total War, which is basically what Empire Total War is. They could have at least included mini-campaigns for the War of Austrian Succession, the Seven Year's War, the Northern War. Instead they included 4 mini campaigns in North America, which were small scale wars of little gaming interest to me.

[Meneldil]

The RtI campaign is more of a tutorial than a real campaign. It's based on an interesting and quite important event, which is appreciated and known not only by military history freaks but also by normal people.

Most people don't give a damn or even know the 7 years war, the Northern war and the Austrian succession. Everybody have heard of the american revolution. Furthermore, it is a good way to cater to north americans, since their continent had more or less been left out of previous TW games.

ETW is not American Revolution Total War. Completing the RtI campaign doesn't take more than a few hours, and you don't even have to do it: you can start a Grand Campaign right away .

[Ibn-Khaldun]

I guess what I'm saying is that per my preferences Napoleon Total War > American Revolution Total War, which is basically what Empire Total War is. They could have at least included mini-campaigns for the War of Austrian Succession, the Seven Year's War, the Northern War. Instead they included 4 mini campaigns in North America, which were small scale wars of little gaming interest to me.

Those 4 mini campaigns are supposed to be a Tutorial. They are not meant to be MTW2 Kindoms style small campaigns.
Also, TW games are there for YOU to create your own history. When player reach 1756(start of Seven Year's war) he have already built an empire that would be unhistorical and such war would never occur.
I'm 100% sure that Napoleonic Wars will come out in the end of the year or at the beginning of next year. It's and opportunity that CA will not pass.

[quadalpha]

I think the normal course of action would have been to read a few reviews before buying it.

Paulus: Hmm ... no comment.

[Aemilius Paulus]

That tells me a lot more about you, than the game... are you really saying you didn't even try it, yet you think to know it's bad?

Look, I read about 100+ pages worth of material before starting to play a game. I am not jesting or exaggerating. I really do read that much. I read every review and watch every video that I can find and that is helpful. I document every feature of the game. I have seen ETW. I have seen countless YouTube videos, read the reviews, followed the threads in Parliament. I have asked my friends who play it, both RL and online.

I know the game is seriously deficient on the campaign level. I know the battles are exceedingly innovative, engrossing and unique, full of new features. However, the part of the TW game that always interested me was the campaign map. The traits system amounted to 50-70% of that interest. It does not take much to make me happy, but CA managed to take that part out. I did not like M2TW for the fact that it had less traits than RTW, and ETW decided to stop centimetres away from throwing out the traits in general.

Paulus: Hmm ... no comment.

No, please, do comment. I am intrigued.
I still like playing battles, very much actually, but without a good campaign map gameplay, it is all meaningless to me. My TW games always revolved around my generals and their development, mostly traits-wise.

I have nothing that will keep me playing for more than a month in ETW. I have been playing mostly Europa Barbarorum for the past almost two years, and looks like I will not move on any time soon.

[quadalpha]

Ah, I see how if you enjoyed the traits system, you might be annoyed at ETW. It's just that your comment about not having to pay for it might have raised a topic that is verboten and I didn't want to go into it.

[Aemilius Paulus]

It's just that your comment about not having to pay for it might have raised a topic that is verboten and I didn't want to go into it.

Nevermind. I am both upright as well as prim and proper.

[Beskar]

I did not like M2TW for the fact that it had less traits than RTW, and ETW decided to stop centimetres away from throwing out the traits in general.

I will give you a piece of paper with traits on and you can pay me £30 for it. The rest of the game is unimportant.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I will give you a piece of paper with traits on and you can pay me £30 for it. The rest of the game is unimportant.

Huh? What was that intended to be? Sarcasm? Abortive quip? Mockery? Spam? A combination of a couple? I am lost. I suppose it was the second, eh?

[Daevyll]

However, the part of the TW game that always interested me was the campaign map. The traits system amounted to 50-70% of that interest. It does not take much to make me happy, but CA managed to take that part out. I did not like M2TW for the fact that it had less traits than RTW, and ETW decided to stop centimetres away from throwing out the traits in general.

Out of interest, how could you possibly enjoy the utterly illogical, random, downright annoying 'feature' that was traits in RTW? Was I missing something?
I liked the idea too, but the execution.... at least in ETW, the traits/retinue is reasonable and explained how you got them (and how you can get rid of them if possible).

[Aemilius Paulus]

Out of interest, how could you possibly enjoy the utterly illogical, random, downright annoying 'feature' that was traits in RTW? Was I missing something?
I liked the idea too, but the execution.... at least in ETW, the traits/retinue is reasonable and explained how you got them (and how you can get rid of them if possible).

No illogical. It added realism, even if the mechanics were not perfect. The traits gave RTW sort of an RPG feel I suppose. I do not play RPGs at all; all I play are RTS/TW-RTT games. But yet, I enjoy the experience of having a character sort of "level up" with numerous traits. It makes the game feel so unique and customised. Every campaign becomes different.

As I have said, I am not a battle person. I like them, but they are secondary. Without them, TW would be nothing, so they are necessary, but not so important to constitute a major part of the game.

But anyway, if you just read EDCT (export_desc_character_traits), you would know how to get traits. I spent days reading that file. And if the vanilla file was huge, then the Europa Barbarorum EDCT was gargantuan and titanic. I do not know why you do not enjoy traits. I know the more casual TW players do not care about them, just as they do not care about micromanagement, but I though the harder-core veterans like you and me always valued the traits system. It was so unique after all... I suppose it depends on what kind of person you are. For me, traits is everything, but not everyone is the same...

[Callahan9119]

This cavalcade of people clamoring for "Napoleonic Era" gameplay amuse me. Its just a man, a fantastic general and a despotic emperor...You cannot base an expansion on this or the American Civil War, it would be a linear farce.

Disband your troops in france, set the taxes on peasants to high and then recruit a general and pretend or something....and spare us CA bowing to the demands of people who have not thought this through.

I'm gonna go back to my game of Fredrick the Great: Total War

see how that works?

[pevergreen]

First of all, any discussion about illegally obtaining games is not welcome here. please remove the comments about it.

The trait systems in M2TW and RTW were both flawed and hilarious.

A large portion of the traits simply did not work. Many more were incredibly hard to get, or too easy. (spend 1 turn in a city? Pagan Magician! Slave woman! Lazy General!)

[quadalpha]

I think the demand is for "Napoleonic units" and events, maybe a scenario or two, a few historical battles, and you have yourself an expansion pack.

Paulus: I always found the traits system a bit too arbitrary and fiddly. I couldn't be bothered to jump through the hoops to get them.

Edit: p: He might have got it as a present, you know.

[Sheogorath]

The demand for Napoleonic units may stem from the fact that all the European (and a couple of the non-European) factions all share the same unit models. It'd be nice to see some of the variety which came about later on, you know? :\

Fortunately it looks like the European Wars mod will fix that very nicely, and people are already coming out with texture packs.

[Aemilius Paulus]

First of all, any discussion about illegally obtaining games is not welcome here. please remove the comments about it.

I never said anything about illegal ways. But now that you mentioned it, I suppose I am forced to edit my comment. My post was intentionally ambiguous and it did not say anything that is not specifically forbidden. Not only this, but how do you know my ETW was not a present?