the most logical NapoleonTW review so far

[loony]

Here you go
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...16#post6864016

to everyone who has played DMUC, you'll know that this guy knows what he's talking about.

[Freedom Onanist]

Maybe tempered by the knowledge that this is the chap who didn't get a job with CA and threw his dummy out of the pram about it.

I must be one of those "dark matters" that prefer "simple" games - patronising?

[Fisherking]

It is also the most critically negative review of the game.

It makes some good points but it is also colored by some personal opinions.

From what I have seen those who like the game enough to say so is about 95% of postings.

Those who dislike it seem to be a very small minority, even if they try to be very vocal about it.

I am sure that within a week we will know of any and all major flaws in the game.

There are some people who are never going to admit to liking or even being indifferent to the BAI.

It has been a complaint for ever. And there are a few who love to hate CA so much they invent problems or blow out of proportion everything they deem a bug or historical mistake.

In the end no review is going to tell you if you like it or how much you like or hate it. It is all personal and subjective.

For my part I think they did a decent job, but I miss the wider scope and field of ETW.

[Royce]

You make some good points also! Darth's review seems to say the cannons are really uneffective. I found the cannons to be awsome especially if you have 3 or more and they have gained battle experiance. I've been able to do some big dammage as should be cannons were a big part of Napoleon's strategy. I would like more time to play the different campaigns of Napoleon too short a time limit for me and I never have liked time limits. I really like this period in history. That's why I broke down and made the purchase. I use to play a Dos based game called Waterloo it took the player through 4 battles leading up to Watterloo and they were not tied together like I thought they should have been (meaning the outcome of one should have affected the other). You also could not build troops you got some reinforcements but that was it. My point is I guess they just do not make perfect games. We all like different things.

[antisocialmunky]

The biggest fun part for me is the fact that SIEGES ARE FINALLY WORKING. :)

[DisruptorX]

Darth's review seems to say the cannons are really uneffective. I found the cannons to be awsome especially if you have 3 or more and they have gained battle experiance. .

A dead on hit from a howitzer makes a big hole in a unit and drops their morale by half. Cannons are better than ever.

[Lucius Verenus]

It is also the most critically negative review of the game.

It makes some good points but it is also colored by some personal opinions.

From what I have seen those who like the game enough to say so is about 95% of postings.

Those who dislike it seem to be a very small minority, even if they try to be very vocal about it.

For my part I think they did a decent job, but I miss the wider scope and field of ETW.

There is another explanation for the relative (to ETW) lack of criticism Fisherking , I - and many others - said in the ETW fora that we will never buy again until we have been convinced by those who do that the game is actually worth the playing (and buying).

So maybe the most vocal critics of ETW are not critiquing NTW because we haven't bought it .

From what I have read here and elsewhere, there _are_ a few improvements, but given the limited nature of NTW and the cost (US$80 on steam so likely AU$100 in my local shop), think it's way overpriced and very limited in scope.

The 'praise' I have seen is fairly faint and often accompanied by negative comments about it's nature - including those from yourself :)

So I wont be buying this, so wont be complaining about it either, I think there's a lot more like me. w
e cared enough about ETW - having bought it - to plead for changes. These were valid issues as you well know and 1.5 has gone some way towards fixing those.

From DV's comments and others it appears the 'melee bug' has been improved but still occurs in some circumstances, as 'Naval Invasions' were 'improved' but still rarely happened in ETW 1.5 ( and from some comments this has not changed in NTW either).

Now if they had applied the fixes (if any) to the ETW BAI and CAI and offered NTW as a dlc expansion at US$15 I would definitely have tried it out.

Regards

LV

[antisocialmunky]

BTW - From what I gather from my gameplay, Artillery has a bad tendency to try and shoot UNDER your men if your cannons are on unfavorable land with respect to enemy units and bounce cannon balls into them. Also, cannons don't seem to calculate for cavalry is correctly.

Also, line infantry still have bad tendency to kill cannon crews in front of them. Fortunately light infantry still shoots around your own men.

[Dead Guy]

Well, say what you will, but the AI obviously still tries to flank charge regiments in the middle of a line, and that is not very flattering of it's capabilities. That's not an improvement. The screens from the battle are a real killer for me. If he had decided to move his line and envelop the clusterflip in the center he would've crushed that attack. It also looked like the AI sent a lone infantry unit way way out on the flank around the ends of his line, that unit could have easily been defeated since it was so isolated, and he didn't even need to lure it out there. It seems like the AI tries to make some sound manouvers, only it performs them at the completely wrong point in time. I'm almost impressed it made it into firing range in a coherent fashion, before entering barbarian horde mode.

[loony]

well, I am sure there are different opinions, however, what I liked about the review is SCREEENS. it is not some "bah CA s*cks", "never liked them anyway" rant. Based on screens and actual battles.

i do agree there is a lot of personal opinion there; i do not always agree with those opinions, but I love the fact that the author also stresses that those are nothing but opinions. contrary to people shouting their opinions for a fact.

to all the happy campers I would like to note that there are different demands people have for their games; especially expensive ones.

[Madoushi]

I felt IGN's review sounded more balanced, but I've still to play the game.

[edyzmedieval]

The review smacks of bitterness. And just goes to show once more that the following quote is true

"It's harder to persuade a man than a whole nation."

99% of the people agree with Darth, but most people failed to notice that he's actually encouraging people not to buy Napoleon TW just because it's bad. He's basically implying that "with me on the team, it would have been much better." And there's many reports of people not experiencing the melee bug...

Not convinced by his review.

[Fisherking]

It is still just opinion (mine) but I would say this is a fair review.

http://www.strategyinformer.com/pc/n...ar/review.html

loony, I agree with most of your last post.

The thing I find most disturbing about Darth’s post is just that little bit about he didn’t buy the game and he won’t until there are mod tools...He reviewed a free press version...and he won’t be working on anything to improve NTW.

That just smacks of so many things at once, and none are exactly complimentary.

Don’t get me wrong for even a minute; I want the mod tools too, it is just the way it is done.

[Captain Fishpants]

...this is the chap who didn't get a job with CA and threw his dummy out of the pram about it...

Darth was interviewed a couple of years ago, and didn't get a job as you say. His version of events has been on TWC. Professional courtesy and a respect for confidentiality means we can never say anything substantive about the matter.

...And there are a few who love to hate CA so much they invent problems or blow out of proportion everything they deem a bug or historical mistake.

...

To be honest, hate is the only thing that keeps me coming in to ruin the game and individual lives every single day.

He said he got a copy from a friend, Fishy.

...

Indeed. But his friend happened to be an editor who was sent a review copy of the pre-release code. I'd be willing to take a small risk and venture that what he reviewed isn't necessarily the same as what paying customers receive. I may be wrong in this, or I may not.

[Fisherking]

To be honest, hate is the only thing that keeps me coming in to ruin the game and individual lives every single day.

That sounds much more like a Sergeant Major than a Captain...

Or a Colonel with a riding crop....

[Knight of Ne]

Indeed. But his friend happened to be an editor who was sent a review copy of the pre-release code. I'd be willing to take a small risk and venture that what he reviewed isn't necessarily the same as what paying customers receive. I may be wrong in this, or I may not.

But that also means that he may not be experiencing the same things as others who have the game because he does/may not have the actual release version.

To be honest i didnt agree which much of what Darth said but then again i rarely ever agree with reviews.

Ne

[caravel]

Maybe tempered by the knowledge that this is the chap who didn't get a job with CA and threw his dummy out of the pram about it.

Hello,

Learn the facts first. The "chap" is one of the most respected and capable modders the community has produced. CA have produced sub standard games since the release of RTW v1.0. It is the efforts of the modding community that has turned these games around and made them half decent.

And there are a few who love to hate CA so much they invent problems or blow out of proportion everything they deem a bug or historical mistake.

Nonsense and a gross generalisation. Those criticising CA's work are not motivated by simple hatred - that is in fact slander. The issue is the decline in quality of CA's games over the last few years. Games like TW will attract criticism, both positive and negative. This is being marketed as an historical wargame - expect criticism.

The review smacks of bitterness. And just goes to show once more that the following quote is true

Perhaps you're confusing bitterness over the state of "the game" with the supposed "bitterness" that you know nothing of and are therefor not qualified to comment on?

He said he got a copy from a friend, Fishy.

As for the rest of his review, he's approaching it from an absolutist point of view. He's measuring it up against a hypothetical perfect game while others are comparing it ETW and others to other games.

No need to to attack the fellow's argument with such insinuations is there?

He approaches it from the best point of view. Simply comparing the game with another game makes for a flawed review. This is a review by an expert modder with a lot of experience and should be taken as such. A comparison of the game "as is" compared with the hypothetical capabilities of the engine is a better type of review, as a comparison of RTW and RTR/EB is also a comparison worth reading.

I'd be willing to take a small risk and venture that what he reviewed isn't necessarily the same as what paying customers receive. I may be wrong in this, or I may not.

Ah, so you distribute special versions to the reviewers? Perhaps that accounts discrepencies between reviews and end user experience with ETW eh...?

[edyzmedieval]

Hello,

Perhaps you're confusing bitterness over the state of "the game" with the supposed "bitterness" that you know nothing of and are therefor not qualified to comment on?

I spilled my drink over my keyboard in laughter and disgust at the same time. That's enough for a reply to your "qualifications".

[Madoushi]

Nonsense and a gross generalisation. Those criticising CA's work are not motivated by simple hatred - that is in fact slander. The issue is the decline in quality of CA's games over the last few years. Games like TW will attract criticism, both positive and negative. This is being marketed as an historical wargame - expect criticism.

Honestly, I've found each TW from STW to MII has been better than the last, in my opinion.

My main qualm with Rome was simply the hostile and untrustworthy campaign AI combined with the relative lack of flexibility in diplomacy, but I still enjoyed it thoroughly after MTW, even as I got wiped out in game after game, and I was just as impressed by MII when I first played it.

They all have flaws, and the modding community has done much to fix them, but there's really no other game like a TW game.

[Fisherking]

Nonsense and a gross generalisation. Those criticising CA's work are not motivated by simple hatred - that is in fact slander. The issue is the decline in quality of CA's games over the last few years. Games like TW will attract criticism, both positive and negative. This is being marketed as an historical wargame - expect criticism.

And what part of “And there are a few” makes it a gross generalization?

I was speaking of a small percentage who either never like anything or rant on about some perceived flaw that tends to mystify most of us. Frankly I even wonder if they know more about the game than the title.

That was not directed at anyone but it seems to have struck a nerve with you.

Why so?

[NimitsTexan]

Nonsense and a gross generalisation. Those criticising CA's work are not motivated by simple hatred - that is in fact slander. The issue is the decline in quality of CA's games over the last few years.

Personally, I have found each TW release more enjoyable than the last, and I do not buy the decline in quality. At worst, they have remained static (fixing some problems and introducing others), but even in the case of the much maligned BAI, I think there has been an improvement from RTW to ETW. I actually took bigger issue with the diplomatic over-agressiveness of the CAI and its almost pre-programed decisions to start a-historic wars (pitting England-Austria against Prussia-Poland in 1700) than anything else.

[Beskar]

Darth was interviewed a couple of years ago, and didn't get a job as you say. His version of events has been on TWC. Professional courtesy and a respect for confidentiality means we can never say anything substantive about the matter.

In short "There is definitely two sides to the story and we are in a position where we cannot comment." or implied as much.

To be honest, hate is the only thing that keeps me coming in to ruin the game and individual lives every single day.

This unfortunately, made me laugh.

Indeed. But his friend happened to be an editor who was sent a review copy of the pre-release code. I'd be willing to take a small risk and venture that what he reviewed isn't necessarily the same as what paying customers receive. I may be wrong in this, or I may not.

Was there a big difference between the two versions?

[Vlad Tzepes]

...But his friend happened to be an editor who was sent a review copy of the pre-release code. I'd be willing to take a small risk and venture that what he reviewed isn't necessarily the same as what paying customers receive. I may be wrong in this, or I may not.

He checked the official release as well:

"My main test version of the game was the “Dev Edition” which was pre-released for the journalists. I also have checked the retail version from a friend to see that the main problems were still evident (The Dev version lacks only some minor fixes to graphics, sounds etc. if it is not completely identical)."

[Royce]

Afer reading Darth's review I have to say he makes alot of good points. I'm usually disapointed in games and how the AI works. Most of all I'm let down by the people who created these games with such dumb things such as one turn equals one year, how stupid is that! I wasn't going to purchase NTW but I did even after reading Darth's review, I guess I wanted to see for myself. I like the new time having turns by month. I'm not a Modder or a programmer but I've been playing games for ever. I have all of the TW games. Each one should get better but they do not. I've just started playing the Battles of Napoleon and I'm at Egypt. So far the cannons seem to be fine but game crashes alot. Again the time limit seems to make the game less enjoyable. I just get the Army up to snuff and the game ends. Not much time for tactics. I will continue to play and post comments. But again Darth is correct the AI really needs a big overhaul. It upsets and frustrates me when the AI sends one cannon unit and one cav. unit to attack and army of 12 units or more.