Happy with the decision made?

[TinCow]

Yes, simply because it promises a bit of change. I liked the evolution from the STW/MTW engine to the RTW/M2TW engine. I expect that CA will make similarly great leaps to the third gen engine.

Now I am just praying that the AI doesn't get left behind in the jump.

[ixidor]

Actually, very happy. They had already 2 games about the medieval era, as from Rome. The asian part was also aboarded. Also, i think this game can be awesome since you have the possibility the dominate the world, literally! I mean, we don't know it but, if you can dominate all europe, north africa, west asia and most of america, why not to have a world map?

Also:

http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots...4635&id=104099

A love this graphics :)

[iblewafuse14]

I'm not sure... I would've liked to have seen a new game around like "Ancient Total War" where the focus isn't on Rome as much, maybe more like Grecce and East Asia, Would be nice to have factions that had great navaies such as the Greeks, Persians, Phoenicians, would be great to have triemes ramming into an enemy ship whiling slowly moving back to let it sink

[TB666]

Since I love gunpowder units and loves the NTW1 mod for MTW1, this era fits me like a glove.
And to make it even more special, naval battles.
I couldn't be more happier with this.

[Furious Mental]

Finally, pantaloons!

[Csargo]

I'm happy with it, but I would hope that they would have extend the timeline a little.

[christof139]

Too short a time period for this new game. It could have been extended to the ACW etc. with Ironclads, stopping at about 1870 or so.

Seems like a Pirates game in effect, or Great Age of Sail or whatever the older and good game was named.

Also seems like a quickie, a game made with a new engine just to see how it will be accepted, then maybe in the future other time periods will be covered such as the Ancients through Renaissance eras.

I am still waiting for an Ancients adn Medieval naval Warfare game, and it shouldn't be hard at all to produce. That would be great and a lot more fun methinks, at IMHO, and I m also waiting on a mid 1800's to about 1870 or 1880 era naval game encompassing the ACW and Ironclads.

Chris

[fenir]

As most of you know me, I am most certainly not likely to mince words if I think the game mechanics have let us down.
But I think many here (and understandably after M2TW), are a little wary of the claims made by the marketers.
As we all know and understand marketing is about...Ok put nicely, propaganda.
Hence the importance of coders, and the game developers information more than anything else.

But, lets not jump the gun.
The inclusion of Naval battles is certainly a step forward. It is something we asked for(and hoped for) way back in MTW.
It was almost a forgone conclusion that CA would progress the time line due to the inclusion of Cannon and Musket in M2TW, by precedence CA try out the toys in a prep, within each previous game.
And no different here.
But we must deviod ourselves of our current opinions and focus instead upon the developing new release.
Perhaps, there is still time to help with what we want with regards to the new game?
As CA release information, lets us try and build upon it with regards to information they provide, and the information we otherwise feel needs to be included.
With ETW I hope to see some basic improvements, such as increase in tradible goods, with the ability to mod the number and types.
I would like to see the return of Titles. As in MTW attach to the name, and ability to award titles to generals et cetera... of Different ranks, exempli gratia; Knight (sir), Baron, Viscount, Earl, Marques, Dukes, and maybe even Princes. All with the ability to preceed in lineage.
I would like to see and end to adoption in the family tree. It was way over used and disfunctional by comparision with MTW family tree imho.
I do like the generals part tho. But not including the generals marriage to a princess and right to claim family in succession.
But, perhaps we can have Families of Lords, that as a lord dies, his son takes the titles and still provides service to the empire.
This way allowing the royal family help in the governance of the empire.
Choosing a faction heir, make it primus genetia as in salic law. With the ability to change it if we want? As in RTW.
Make the unit card have a button on it, that can allow us to award titles or view and change other options. to ease the micro mangement.
I hate having to reproduce spies inter alia. Unless they are killed.

So let us work towards making the imporvements of this new game, and hope we are taken note of by the powers that be.
So if not already, lets start a thread in poin form on what we would like to see, and ideas underneath on how we think in the current format, these can be achived.


sincerely

fenir

[Zenicetus]

Too short a time period for this new game. It could have been extended to the ACW etc. with Ironclads, stopping at about 1870 or so.

Seems like a Pirates game in effect, or Great Age of Sail or whatever the older and good game was named.

Sure, but that makes sense if they're actually doing a fairly realistic sail-based naval combat engine. The AI has to be designed to work with those tactics. Once you get into Ironclads you're in the age of Steam. You can point the ship in any direction, and wind-based tactics don't matter. It's a whole other tactical situation, which implies a different tactical AI to develop.

I am still waiting for an Ancients adn Medieval naval Warfare game, and it shouldn't be hard at all to produce. That would be great and a lot more fun methinks, at IMHO, and I m also waiting on a mid 1800's to about 1870 or 1880 era naval game encompassing the ACW and Ironclads.

I'd go for that Ancient/Medieval naval game too. The boarding/ramming action would be fun, and we'd get to play with Greek Fire! Probably more of a niche market thing though, so I understand why they did this as their first naval combat engine. If they get this right (I'm naturally skeptical but I hope I'm proven wrong), then it can be easily adapted to an expansion or later game with steam powered navies, or a mix or sail and steam. Internal combustion powered ships are much easier to model than sailing ships and tactics.

[Rhedd]

I voted "not sure".

I was rather hoping for epic, colorful battles in Ancient China and Korea. (Including naval warfare. Gotta have those Korean ships!)

Empire's time period isn't one that I'd say I'm overly interested in, but the one game I played (ages ago) that was set in this period, I ended up enjoying quite a bit. And I do love naval warfare of this period.

All-in-all, I think it'll be fun, but I'll still play Medieval2 (my very favorite period), as well.

Yay for variety!

[mor dan]

i voted no and for something else. i would prefer them to stay away from gun powder and stick with true formation warfare. the thing that made old school warfare so cool was you basically lined up on both sides and yelled, "let's kick some ass!" and everybody ran in and started swinging swords and axes. it's a bit chaotic, yeah, but much more fun to control in my opinion. i think the landscape would look very different today without the discovery of gun powder.


it's been done like 30 times by KOEI, but i would have liked to have seen a Han Dynasty, or some other Chinese Imperial installment from the turn of the century, or even further back to Babylonian/Persian wars between 600-400 BC, leading up to the Roman Empire. Bandit Kings of Ancient China did the same thing, in the sense that you had until a certain year to complete your goals before the Mongolian conquest began and your game was over.

but yeah, something in between 1000 and 200 BC in the Middle East, or between 200 BC and 600 AD in ancient China.


not that this won't be fun, because it will be a blast and i will pre-order as soon as it is available. but Medieval, Rome,and Medieval 2 all deal in the same area, and all this does is expand on that area by adding north america and i guess more asia and africa. at that point, you might as well just do the whole world. i am uber excited about Naval battles...

[Freedom Onanist]

Well, like I said earlier, personally I can’t think of an era better suited to the mechanics of the TW battles. Credible formations drilled to manoeuvre on a battlefield in different formations. This was never something that fitted comfortably with most of the factions in a medieval or dark ages setting. Even the RTW had a fair few factions which would never have walked about a battlefield in formations of serried ranks – Gauls, Germans, etc… Before anyone jumps down my throat, I don’t mean a bunch of guys in a shieldwall, that’s not a military formation capable of meaningful evolutions and drills.

It makes me wonder when people talk about the lack of tactics in the gunpowder era. As opposed to the medieval? By gunpowder era most of the ancient (classical) texts had been restudied, most of the more fantastical elements tried and dropped in the Renaissance (re-introduction of “legionary” armed troops, attempts to use the turtle, etc…) useful lessons learned and new tactics were evolving. Riflemen and jaegers showing the first outline of what the modern soldier looks like.

I have also felt the dark cloud of “fantasy” hanging over some of the earlier games, where units felt they were in the game to pad out a faction. Got to say this really took off with the “martial arts” film second edition of Shogun TW. Remember the “super samurai” unit of 1 man who could take down a whole formation of spearmen with uber katana (the best sword in the world don’t cha know)? That’s OK for Jacky Chan but not a game that has a pretence at historical accuracy, however tenuous.

The naval battles will simply add an extra layer of icing for me.

Given all that, I do subscribe to the views expressed here that we will still have to wait and see. I am worried not about the battlefield era setting but the campaign AI. This seems to be getting more complex which on the one hand is good, but on the other could seriously rubbish the battles.

One thing that does worry me with the TW series is that reviews always talk of the game being an “RTS”. I just hope it never develops into that – the PAUSE button rules the tactics of this game.

Anyway, after a lot of blather, and just re-itterate, yes I am cautiously happy.

[christof139]

Sure, but that makes sense if they're actually doing a fairly realistic sail-based naval combat engine. The AI has to be designed to work with those tactics. Once you get into Ironclads you're in the age of Steam. You can point the ship in any direction, and wind-based tactics don't matter. It's a whole other tactical situation, which implies a different tactical AI to develop.

I'd go for that Ancient/Medieval naval game too. The boarding/ramming action would be fun, and we'd get to play with Greek Fire! Probably more of a niche market thing though, so I understand why they did this as their first naval combat engine. If they get this right (I'm naturally skeptical but I hope I'm proven wrong), then it can be easily adapted to an expansion or later game with steam powered navies, or a mix or sail and steam. Internal combustion powered ships are much easier to model than sailing ships and tactics.

The same game engine within the same game could handle both sail and steamships, it would be a simple matter of having the steamships not affected by the wind too much if at all, and that would be done by simply coding it into the unit stats etc.

So, I'll wait until these things are done.

For large ancient battles involving hundreds of ships per side, a scale of 1 model/sprite to 5 actual ships might work, as this way you would get the tactiacl feel of such a sea battle, and a land combat game engine could be adapted for use. So, you would have a unit of 5 Triremes as compared to 60 Infantrymen, or 10 Biremes/Liburnians/Uniremes/Hemiolas/Dhows/Knarrs/Whatevers. This could easily be done, but I think it is a matter of just how many customers would appreciate it. If you mantion the word 'Economus' to most people, they probably would think you are speaking of the Greek God of economy or the economy itself in one manner or another.

Chris

PS: @FreedomO.: Actually the Gauls and Germans frequently and usually advanced in serried ranks at a steady pace until they got close enough to the enemy to initiate a charge. They even held their ranks on the defensive in a very disciplined manner and this is documented in several original sources. They weren't idiots but did not have the smaller and more flexible units of the Romans, but they didn't start a charge 200 yard/meters away from the enemy as that would tire them out quickly, and they were very familiar with warfare.

[Freedom Onanist]

PS: @FreedomO.: Actually the Gauls and Germans frequently and usually advanced in serried ranks at a steady pace until they got close enough to the enemy to initiate a charge. They even held their ranks on the defensive in a very disciplined manner and this is documented in several original sources. They weren't idiots but did not have the smaller and more flexible units of the Romans, but they didn't start a charge 200 yard/meters away from the enemy as that would tire them out quickly, and they were very familiar with warfare.

Here we go...

I don't doubt (in fact I know) that the "barbarians" were not idiots and did use formations etc... However, it would have been large bodies of men moving forwards, not discrete units moving around in formation from one end of the battle field to another. They never achieved that kind of flexibility on a consistent basis, precisely because their society was more fractured. Which isn't a negative reflection on them, just a fact of their differences. They never centralised their power structures to the point were they could impose standard training, drills, logistics, uniforms, weaponry, etc... These are all things the TW battle format needs and fits better to the period in question. It wasn't able to comfortably represent the diversity of the barbarian faction in my eyes is all.

[Mikeus Caesar]

I'm happy with the decision made. Although if i'd had it my way, i would have selected 1900 - 1945 as the new time period. I personally believe that there is a chance for good gameplay there, regardless of what some of you think of the period.

[Whacker]

Might as well wade in here. I voted no, because I find the period of time between 1500 and 1900 to be exceedingly boring. Not remotely interested. Further, IF I do decide to buy the next game, it will be due to 1. CA getting back to their roots and making solid strategy games, not arcade-fests designed for the graphic-centered ADD crowd, and 2. due to the opinions of a number of discerning people on these boards whose opinions I value and trust. CA's got to earn my business back.

[Csargo]

Might as well wade in here. I voted no, because I find the period of time between 1500 and 1900 to be exceedingly boring. Not remotely interested. Further, IF I do decide to buy the next game, it will be due to 1. CA getting back to their roots and making solid strategy games, not arcade-fests designed for the graphic-centered ADD crowd, and 2. due to the opinions of a number of discerning people on these boards whose opinions I value and trust. CA's got to earn my business back.

I never understood you...

[Rodion Romanovich]

Will Boney/Nappy era be covered as well?

[Kraggenmor]

I'm looking forward to it. I think the choice of the "Wooden ships & Iron Men" era is spot on in light of the decision to finally add actual naval combat.

I look forward to fighting the Amercian revolutionary war.

[Akeichi Mitsuhide]

im gonna love this game alright. Just hope its the MIITW engine and not a new one(i need a new pc if its a new engine).

[Jack Lusted]

Empire will be using a brand new engine.

[iblewafuse14]

I like the Idea though that you can "capture" buildings on the battlemap and use them to fire on the enemy.. should be neat to see how that works... Hopefully they fix the idea of amubushes.. I think you should be able to move troops in woods.. unless it's obvious there are there.. but say on the other side of some woods.

[Kraggenmor]

I like the Idea though that you can "capture" buildings on the battlemap and use them to fire on the enemy.. should be neat to see how that works...

Thinking about it just now; this feature could lead to some interesting 'capture the flag' type multi player maps.

[BoyarPunk]

Acutally, the more I think about it, I am glad they chose this time period over what could have been (a grand disaster): 1939-1945: Total War

[Cornwallis]

Absolutely psyched for this one. This is the one I've been waiting for since they started making total war

[Matt_Lane]

Yeah, I'd say I'm fairly happy with the direction CA are taking this. I think it would have been interesting to re explore Rome or head East to Medieval Indo-China but if they get the gunpowder and navel battles right and if the AI re write is more successful than MTW2's version then game could be a corker. However I am surprised CA's website only mentions Europe, America and India. I would have thought Africa and East Asia would have been needed in order to properly explore European Empire building.

[Graphic]

Yeah, I'd say I'm fairly happy with the direction CA are taking this. I think it would have been interesting to re explore Rome or head East to Medieval Indo-China but if they get the gunpowder and navel battles right and if the AI re write is more successful than MTW2's version then game could be a corker. However I am surprised CA's website only mentions Europe, America and India. I would have thought Africa and East Asia would have been needed in order to properly explore European Empire building.

My guess is they decided that having an aspect to the game featuring African slaves would be too controversial. They have slaves in RTW and MTW but the slaves that this game would have be a little to fresh on the memory.

My guess is there will be mentions of it in Historical Events and the like, but no slave resource.

[Hooahguy]

im happy, but i wont be if the game is rated "M" or has really high system reqiurements.

[Mailman653]

This is best news I've seen all day, its so awesome, not only can you board ships in naval combat, but you have musicians and drumers on the field of battle just like how it was, this game will be amazing no doubt about it.

I've been dying to play with the Continental army in a game for the longest time.

[Orda Khan]

After all the fuss that was made about M2TW and what we actually got, why would anyone be expecting much from this idea? M2TW is still not fixed.

.......Orda