The Daily Update at the Com

[Fisherking]

Maybe we should start a new thread and call it “ The sometimes Daily Update”?

[Monsieur Alphonse]

My exe file (Empire.exe) was updated on friday 10 July at 20.01 Central European time.

@Fisherking: May be they are on a Holiday.

[Fisherking]

Could be...but it seems like they are off almost every Monday and Friday.

[Monsieur Alphonse]

Could be...but it seems like they are off almost every Monday and Friday.

Long weekend eh

[AussieGiant]

I just read the Naval Update:

I'm really struggling with a 24lb or 36lb cannon sitting on the lowest deck of a SOL being out ranged by a 6lb sloop.

I'm also struggling with a SOL be less accurate than a sloop or frigate.

This might be the first time in my 9 year CA experience where I install a realism mod...

...concerning direction CA, very concerning.

[Hooahguy]

new update:

Hi guys,

A number of you have messaged me asking about the contents of the recent hotfix that was released for Empire: Total War. The download contained the following fixes:

- Fixed issue with the virtual file system whereby on certain hard drives / raid configurations / partitions which were experiencing a crash with sound enabled.

- Fixed a boundary pathfinding crash.

Thanks,

Mark O'Connell
(aka SenseiTW)

[Durallan]

For something to concern you about this game aussiegiant, deeply concerns me, I haven't played empire since they did the july 10 patch, but if it is indeed that bad I may have to install a realism mod aswell! which would be a first time for me as I like trying to get a close to original experience as possible, but yes, I thought the heavier cannons fired or could at the very least fire further than lighter ones, because the more gunpowder you put in the lighter cannons the bigger chance of them exploding? I have absolutely no idea, not a history or gun buff

[Slaists]

For something to concern you about this game aussiegiant, deeply concerns me, I haven't played empire since they did the july 10 patch, but if it is indeed that bad I may have to install a realism mod aswell! which would be a first time for me as I like trying to get a close to original experience as possible, but yes, I thought the heavier cannons fired or could at the very least fire further than lighter ones, because the more gunpowder you put in the lighter cannons the bigger chance of them exploding? I have absolutely no idea, not a history or gun buff

The patch (v 1.04) that would introduce the naval changes has not come out yet.

[AussieGiant]

@ Durallan, The range difference between the 36lber and a 6lber is at least a mile...in the opposite direction CA is taking...that's how much of a "gameplay" change this is.

As Slaists mentions, it's not out yet and I'm going to try and finish my campaign with GB before it does.

[TinCow]

For something to concern you about this game aussiegiant, deeply concerns me, I haven't played empire since they did the july 10 patch, but if it is indeed that bad I may have to install a realism mod aswell! which would be a first time for me as I like trying to get a close to original experience as possible, but yes, I thought the heavier cannons fired or could at the very least fire further than lighter ones, because the more gunpowder you put in the lighter cannons the bigger chance of them exploding? I have absolutely no idea, not a history or gun buff

With the exception of carronades (which are already included in the game), in general the bigger guns got, the farther they shot. The same improvement held true for ships as well: the larger they were, the better they were in all areas. Larger ships could hold more sails, which resulted in higher top speeds. Larger ships could hold more guns and larger guns, which resulted in more firepower and longer ranges than smaller ships. Finally, larger ships were more stable platforms due to their size, which gave them better accuracy than smaller ships.

There are, of course, many exceptions to the above due to changes in ship designs over the years. Ships only increased in speed as they got larger if they expanded lengthwise. If they got wider and (especially) taller, the increase in size could result in a drop in speed. In addition, the type of guns mattered dramatically, not just their numbers. Instead of explaining this myself, I will quote N. A. M. Rodger's The Command of the Ocean, p. 417:

In the case of frigates, however, the number of guns is not a good measure, partly because it included the light guns on quarterdeck and forecastle which could could easily be changed, but mainly because it concealed the most important factor, the calibre of the main battery. Though a thirty-two does not sound much more powerful than a twenty-eight, the twenty-eights had a 9-pounder main armament and the thirty-twos, 12-pounders, giving a broadside 50 per cent heavier. These ships in turn were followed in the American War by the first 18-pounder frigates, rated as thirty-sixes or thirty-eights, but with more than double the broadside of the twenty-eights. It is therefore most useful to refer to frigates, as many contemporaries did, by their main battery calibre, and especially to distinguish the 18-pounder 'heavy frigates' from their predecessors.

The point of all this is simply that CA have taken what was truly a very interesting system of naval warfare in which technological innovation played a massive role in the power of ships, and they have turned it into an arcade system with no basis whatsoever in reality. While often this can be accepted as a sacrifice to gameplay, in this situation the actual historical reality would provide far more interesting and satisfying gameplay if it was followed accurately. For instance, the French tended to build ships out of greener and lighter wood, which resulted in tight ships that were very fast, often faster than their British counterparts. However, the unseasoned wood was not as durable and thus did not stand up as well in battle and the ships had far shorter working lives. Indian shipyards had access to rare, extremely dense woods like ebony, which were expensive but could take far more punishment in a battle and were also nearly impervious to rotting. Stuff like that is perfect fodder for making factions different and unique, and making naval warfare interesting... and it's been completely ignored.

The whole idea of building up to 1st rates is absurd. Naval fleets had main battle ships, frigates, and smaller ships throughout the entire period covered by the game. The improvements came about through advancements in naval architecture, gun design, provisioning, etc. A 1st rate from 1700 would have been shot to kindling by a frigate from 1799, and it had nothing to do with the simple number of guns on board.

[AussieGiant]

Given the technology tree is handled very well, and there is a whole line of naval technology to achieve, the combination of what TC has outlined at a historical level PLUS this in game aspect would create not only an entertaining game but one based solidly in historical accuracy.

Quite a missed opportunity in order to appeal to the console head, arcade types that buy the game to watch some explosions and blow things up.

I'm increasingly hoping that some other games developer jumps into this genre with some serious intentions and shakes up the market.

[Xipe Totec]

ETW is without doubt the best crash ... reload ... the best computer game I have ever crash ... reload ever played. I am certain that both SEGA and CA deserve the most crash ...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

oops forgot to quicksave before that last bit, I'll have to start all over again ...

[Slaists]

With the exception of carronades (which are already included in the game), in general the bigger guns got, the farther they shot. The same improvement held true for ships as well: the larger they were, the better they were in all areas. Larger ships could hold more sails, which resulted in higher top speeds. Larger ships could hold more guns and larger guns, which resulted in more firepower and longer ranges than smaller ships. Finally, larger ships were more stable platforms due to their size, which gave them better accuracy than smaller ships.

There are, of course, many exceptions to the above due to changes in ship designs over the years. Ships only increased in speed as they got larger if they expanded lengthwise. If they got wider and (especially) taller, the increase in size could result in a drop in speed. In addition, the type of guns mattered dramatically, not just their numbers. Instead of explaining this myself, I will quote N. A. M. Rodger's The Command of the Ocean, p. 417:



The point of all this is simply that CA have taken what was truly a very interesting system of naval warfare in which technological innovation played a massive role in the power of ships, and they have turned it into an arcade system with no basis whatsoever in reality. While often this can be accepted as a sacrifice to gameplay, in this situation the actual historical reality would provide far more interesting and satisfying gameplay if it was followed accurately. For instance, the French tended to build ships out of greener and lighter wood, which resulted in tight ships that were very fast, often faster than their British counterparts. However, the unseasoned wood was not as durable and thus did not stand up as well in battle and the ships had far shorter working lives. Indian shipyards had access to rare, extremely dense woods like ebony, which were expensive but could take far more punishment in a battle and were also nearly impervious to rotting. Stuff like that is perfect fodder for making factions different and unique, and making naval warfare interesting... and it's been completely ignored.

The whole idea of building up to 1st rates is absurd. Naval fleets had main battle ships, frigates, and smaller ships throughout the entire period covered by the game. The improvements came about through advancements in naval architecture, gun design, provisioning, etc. A 1st rate from 1700 would have been shot to kindling by a frigate from 1799, and it had nothing to do with the simple number of guns on board.

Sigh... I hope, someone comes up with the perfect ETW historical-reality naval mod soon.

Darth's modifications render the naval warfare much more tactical. It would be a dream mod, if it could be separated from the overall changes he makes (I feel quite a few of them are not to my taste) + it would be possible to add the faction related unique flavors that you mention above.

[Zenicetus]

Given the technology tree is handled very well, and there is a whole line of naval technology to achieve, the combination of what TC has outlined at a historical level PLUS this in game aspect would create not only an entertaining game but one based solidly in historical accuracy.

It goes without saying (but I'll say it anyway as the sailor curmudgeon here)... it would only be historically accurate if the sailing dynamics were also realistic. Otherwise it doesn't matter whether the ships and weapons are realistic. Giving the land armies accurate weapon stats wouldn't matter either, if they all had motorbikes to ride around the battlefield. Current "tactics" for winning a naval battle where wind direction can be ignored, are a total joke.

Modders can probably undo whatever rock paper scissor "balancing" CA is about to impose on the game, but but I don't know whether the sailing dynamics can be altered, or if the AI would know how to handle it. Also, if the ship and weapon stats are modded to something reasonably realistic, would the strategic AI build appropriate fleets, or would it still try to build rock-paper-scissor fleets? I guess we'll see.

Quite a missed opportunity in order to appeal to the console head, arcade types that buy the game to watch some explosions and blow things up.

It does seem like almost all the effort went into eye candy for the naval battles. I still don't understand why they're so different from the land battles, which are reasonably realistic.

I'm increasingly hoping that some other games developer jumps into this genre with some serious intentions and shakes up the market.

It's bound to happen eventually. Realistic historical wargames are a niche market, but it is a market regardless. It needs to be done by a smaller company, one that isn't as driven to reach the largest possible audience with a dumbed-down game.

[Peasant Phill]

snip
Modders can probably undo whatever rock paper scissor "balancing" CA is about to impose on the game, but but I don't know whether the sailing dynamics can be altered, or if the AI would know how to handle it.
snip

I was under the impression that there was a mod floating around that countered the 'sailing against the wind'-feature. And that the AI even zigzagged, like it should, when it had to sail in that direction. Unfortunatly I can't remember the mod's name right now.

Are there other sailing dynamics you're thinking about.

[AussieGiant]

I can understand the "sailing mechanics" decision and I'm able to get past it.

This was because I thought the rest of the sailing mechanics would be based loosely on the rest of reality, which is pretty much everything Zenicetus and TinCow have stated in their posts.

Now that CA are diverging, and I mean, "getting in a rocket ship and leaving the planet", levels of diversion it's really starting to annoy me.

[AussieGiant]

And more importantly.

While I'm aware this is only one board of many about ETW, I've not seen any level of dissatisfaction with the aspects of naval combat that CA have decided to change.

I mean some dude with enough time on his hands inside CA seems to have been told to review the whole thing and has come up with this little gem.

It's like they are changing this aspect of the game even when there is no pressure to do so.

[TinCow]

Well, as long as they can fix the campaign map AI, I suppose all the rest can be done by modders. Have the modding tools been released yet, or has everything so far been done without them?

[Slaists]

No tools yet.

[Prodigal]

And more importantly.

While I'm aware this is only one board of many about ETW, I've not seen any level of dissatisfaction with the aspects of naval combat that CA have decided to change.

I mean some dude with enough time on his hands inside CA seems to have been told to review the whole thing and has come up with this little gem.

It's like they are changing this aspect of the game even when there is no pressure to do so.

Exactly! Its a wind down job that someone that just fancies dickering around with a certain bit of code before they go off on holiday.

That they're breaking one of the few things in the game that was ok as it was seems irrelevent.

It's all getting a bit weird & desperate, am looking forward to some decent mod's...Although allowing people access to reskin troops would mean they couldn't milk the sf cash cow, & it would be even more apparent what a rip off it was in the first place.

[Husar]

So we had at least three threads lately about how diplomacy was broken and almost none about how bad the naval battles were balanced. Now the org may not be the only TW community but it seems a bit odd that the next news then is about how they will "fix"(destroy) what isn't broken and absolutely nothing about fixing what everybody here complains about.

If they really want to lose me as a customer they can go ahead with that plan, not like I count, I'm sure there will be an even larger fanbase for stone, paper, scissors: total war.

[Slaists]

So we had at least three threads lately about how diplomacy was broken and almost none about how bad the naval battles were balanced. Now the org may not be the only TW community but it seems a bit odd that the next news then is about how they will "fix"(destroy) what isn't broken and absolutely nothing about fixing what everybody here complains about.

If they really want to lose me as a customer they can go ahead with that plan, not like I count, I'm sure there will be an even larger fanbase for stone, paper, scissors: total war.

Well, twcenter.net seems to have larger audience nowadays (than .org). I do not remember seeing ANY threads about naval balance there either. If anything, there have been posts complaining about the ship ability to sail against the wind (even the slowest of ships CAN do that in ETW, unless modded).

And you're right, there have been numerous posts/complaints about the diplomacy (also on twcenter).

As to myself: personally, I do not find diplomacy to be such a huge problem. I've played 3 campaigns post 1.03; one of them to the glorious end. My allies stayed my allies all through those campaigns. The only qualm I had was getting -200 reputation for siding with my protectorate rather than with my ally (Spain) AND getting the same hit with the very faction I was defending... That surely seems like a bug.

For me the campaign and battle AI is the BIGGEST problem the game has. I wish they (CA) invested more (considerably more) time in boosting both AI's.

Then again, they have different people working on unit balance, different people working the map/ai aspects. They can do both at the same time. I figure, the naval balance has been Lusted's "baby", so, let's let him have it. We'll see how the balance actually plays out when the patch comes out. If that range/accuracy will be as annoying as screeching women and flaming pigs, we'll just mod it out. Well, I hope someone will.

[Lucius Verenus]

- Fixed issue with the virtual file system whereby on certain hard drives / raid configurations / partitions which were experiencing a crash with sound enabled.

- Fixed a boundary pathfinding crash.:

They fix one of the MAJOR problems people have been having and only tell us this when people ask what the fix actually was.

(I have been playing with the sound off for over a week since I found that eliminated 90% of my CTD's)

Then they trumpet how they are going to totally turn Naval technology on it's head !!

Whatever the CA blokes have at tea-break, I don't want it

[Fisherking]

Here is what is new. How did you miss this!

16th July:

It's time to start talking about the contents of the next Empire patch, which we're aware many of you are curious about.

Without wishing to hype it, this one will be a big one and it will predominantly focus on the Campaign AI.

Our priorities with the next release are to:

- Significantly increase the rate of naval invasions. Including those across theatres.
- Increase AI aggression and improve use of armies.
- Increase the creation and retention of strong mixed higher level unit armies by the CAI.

Some of these are big changes and will take time, so I'm not in a position to confirm a release date for the patch yet.

For those of you wondering how we're progressing, let's just say I've now seen a Marathan eastern seaboard of the United States with both as AI factions.


Naturally we'll update more regularly as the patch develops.

Kind regards,
Kieran

[Slaists]

- Significantly increase the rate of naval invasions. Including those across theatres.
- Increase AI aggression and improve use of armies.
- Increase the creation and retention of strong mixed higher level unit armies by the CAI.

I like the sound of this.

[Hooahguy]

maratha in the US? what the ?
but besides the naval changes, i cant wait!

[Sheogorath]

I like the sound of this.

It depends on what they mean. The first one is probably good, unless it winds up as RTW/MTW2-style 'invasions' consisting soley of the 1st Imperial One Legged Peasant Division.

The second one probably means MORE DoW's. The campaign AI doesn't need to be more aggressive, it just needs to act on its current aggression.

'Mixed unit' armies...well, the AI builds one of every unit and that's that...eh?


I know I sound cynical, but given CA's track record with Empire thus far, I think that's allowed.

[Karash]

Would like to see "Smart Wars" instead of More wars...It would be GREAT to see the AI recognize that it is headed for defeat OR push its advantage against other nations in a smarter way.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Same for naval invasions, really. Smarter would be better then more. In my recent campaign Spain insists on dropping large armies in northern France.
Meanwhile the Brits drop one single stack on Flanders and decide to leave it at that. No foothold on the continent, driven out of the continental US yet stack upon stack sit unemployed in England. All going nowhere.

[Quickening]

I think it's kinda weird that someone could play this game in its current state and think "yes, the AI must attack more often".