The Daily Update at the Com

[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".

[Daveybaby]

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.

Except that theres an item specifically mentioning stronger army composition, isnt there.

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.

Youre confusing the word 'aggressive' with 'hostile'. At the moment the CAI is too hostile, but it isnt nearly aggressive enough when it comes to acting on that hostility.

[Fisherking]

Much more of AI behavior needs to be faction based rather than campaign based.

Give the factions some personality rather than having them run by a random events generator that is out to screw the player.

An aggressive and hostile France is much different than an aggressive and hostile Saxony or other one region faction. The minors first need to insure their survival before going to war with all the world.

There is nothing wrong with some few factions being extremely expansionist but it should not be every faction in every campaign.

I totally agree that once war is declared it should be prosecuted. Declaring war and sitting there until attacked or declaring war without the intent of conquest is much too extreme a measure.

As to naval invasions, having everyone wandering the seas with a stack of troops looking for some place to unload is shear rubbish. I is another nuisance factor that this game certainly does not need. There are more than enough.

Invasions for the purpose of attacking an enemy in the far away is much different. So is trying to snap up some great trade asset but invasions of every rock or floating log just take away from a game that seems to have lost a lot of its feel to the silly AI already. The invasions should be purposeful and not random wanderings or targets of opportunity.

The thing in the game that should be most historically accurate are the units and their capabilities. Most of the rest is up for grabs at least within reasonable limits. There is nothing wrong with Mexico emerging and trying to take over the Americas. There is nothing wrong with the Cherokee trying to drive out the Europeans and expand into other native areas. But it would be a bit over the top if they invaded Europe or India.

The game is not a fantasy realm but is instead historically based. There are enough fantasy games without turning this one into one.

[Durallan]

If you love ridiculous sea invasions then go back to M2TW for a while.

I don’t like the ridiculous and outrageous invasions any more than I like the silly DoWs.

If you were offered peace and money than chances are you were not fighting them any way and you betrayed an ally by signing the peace agreement.

Just wait until you have idiots invading everywhere and carrying huge armies on one brig.

I will not go back to medieval 2 total war for awhile, I do love medieval 2 total war but I'm playing empire right now. I must say that I resent your rather hostile attitude. At any rate you misread my post.

Okay I'm Great Britain. My Allies are Prussia and The United Provinces. At the end of a turn the United Provinces declares war on Prussia. I select - Side with the Defender, Prussia. This now turns everyone that I had an Alliance with into HOSTILE, INCLUDING PRUSSIA. How is that betraying an ally? The United Provinces betrayed me and Prussias trust by declaring war on them in the first place? How am I public enemy number 1 by wanting to stick up for an ally that gets attacked?? By the way I haven't seen alot of rediculous invasions in my campaign yet.

I do not mind if Marathas or Mughal decides it has heard about the fantastic wonders of America and wants it for its own, if it sends a large invasion force, with enough protection and makes that its primary goal that would be a good campaign AI. however if it sent its army on one brig and got lucky landing it on east coast USA and doesn't seem to have any further interest int he region that would annoy me. Like Wars in this game, Invasions should be taken very seriously by the AI and made its primary concern to ensure success.

This 'Game' is about empire expansion and conquest in the 18th century, whos to say maratha can't invade america? Or the United States invade india if it so desires to spread its ideas of peace freedom and mom's apple pie at sword point? everything after 1700 is meant to be up in the air, otherwise it would get rather boring. I have to say that I would disagree to native americans launching invasions of europe or india, because their war canoes wouldn't survive the trip, but then i've never seen them launch a naval invasion let alone build a ship.