New trailer

[Naefen]

I know its what some people love doing on these forums but.... I just gotta say as a gamer (not a historian/sailor/soldier) I love it!!

I dont know anything about wind directions, sails, or actual combat at sea in 1700`s and if I did..I wouldnt expect it to be realistic anyways.
Like I said... I know you guys love discussing how it should be and how it was hehehe. Just as much as I like reading it:)

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Eh? I think you are confused, The Pianist. Square rigged ships tacked like that too, in order to "sail against the wind". The only advantage lateen rigged ships have is that they can sail closer to the wind, thus making more progress while tacking less.

I do find the simplistic model a slight disappointment, but I expected as much and something is better then nothing. The market for fighting sail games isn't exactly crowded these days. And who knows? Maybe there is a .txt somewhere in ETW that allows us to mod sailing parameters to approach reality.

[Discoman]

Well that looks awesome. The boarding phase was just great and the animations were smooth and fluid.

[Zenicetus]

But actual sea battles should be implemented with wind effect as you described, so the sea battle simulation would require a skill level similar to land battles in Total War series. Otherwise, if sea battles required low skill, they would quickly become monotonous and all the same, and people would start doing auto-resolve all the time after they get used to the eye candy.

Exactly... .why shouldn't the sea battles be as interesting in terms of tactical maneuver, as the land battles? I mean, isn't tactical maneuver the whole reason we buy these Total War games? If there is no real tactical maneuver involving realistic points of sail and wind direction, then it's not a sail combat game, it's something else entirely. It reduces combat to a question of who has the most firepower, or who can get their boarding parties in range. Maybe that's the point? To re-use soldier animations from the land battles?

P.S. and this is not related to ETW, but from a book with the topic of something like Everything about Galleys or something like Evolution of Ships, that I read either in late elementary school or early secondary school, from the library, there is a way of sailing upwind, but impossible with square sails. The book had a curving-one-way-then-the-other diagram. It's when a ship is small, and only has a triangular sail. It was invented either by the Greeks or the Polynesians, and by moving the triangular sail one way, and then the other, it's possible to sail upwind in a zigzagging diagonal manner.

As noted by Elmar, square-riggers could tack too, but at very wide angles off the wind, to the point where reaching a destination directly upwind wasn't really practical. Trade routes were based on prevailing wind directions, which is why it was so easy for pirates and privateers to jump the Spanish treasure fleets. They had to follow a prescribed route around the Caribbean basin, determined by prevailing wind direction.

That lateen rig is better, but still very inefficient compared to modern designs. A modern racing sloop can point to within something like 35 degrees of the true wind direction, but no closer (aside from exotic designs like autogyros, and wind vanes driving propellers). Nothing used in the time period covered by the game would be remotely that efficient, not even the "pirate sloops" often seen in games. Many sea battles involving square riggers would be tail chases, or parallel engagements between battle lines with the wind at the back of both fleets... unless one fleet could manage to get far enough upwind for a "crossing the T" maneuver. Usually that would happen when one fleet would find itself lucky enough to start the engagement upwind (and I wonder how CA is going to handle that part too... a turn-based game would give huge advantage to the player or AI on the current turn, if the wind direction is known in advance).

The limitations are what make it interesting to deal with, whether it's a historical sea battle or a modern sailboat race. Of course that brings up another issue... maybe they're dumbing down realistic sailing not because they think the players don't want it, but because the AI isn't good enough to handle it? I hope that's not the case, but poor tactical maneuver by the AI was one of the things we always complained about with land battles in the RTW and M2TW games.

Anyway, I'm holding out hope that the trailer is showing something set up just for eye candy graphic impact, and doesn't represent the way actual battles will be fought. I can't believe they'd blow off the Nelson wannabees and the Patrick O'Brian fans with arcade-like sea battles.

[R'as al Ghul]

I wonder if fleet battles are included as an option for Multiplayer battles?

[Martok]

I believe they are, although I can't remember who said that. I'm pretty sure they're in, though.

[hoom]

I can't concieve of naval battles not being an option for multiplayer.

Regarding the tactics/sailing dead upwind: I hope & expect the situation to be that while you can sail directly upwind, the speed & maneuverability penalty for doing it should be severe such that you'd be nearly always better off tacking at more accurate angles.

If you can 'motor' around sailing upwind at good pace & able to quickly fall off onto a different tack, then that would definitely be a bad thing.
CA said that there will be a big speed penalty for going dead upwind.

The shots in this video are not long enough & don't show a continuous battle so I choose to take the cautiously optimistic point of view.

[Sheogorath]

It should also be pointed out that, in the early bits of the game at least, a number of ships should still be able to use oars as propulsion besides your standard galleys.

Speaking of galleys, didnt see any in the trailer. Thats a bit disappointing, considering how important they were in several conflicts.

[hoom]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

[Pantsalot]

The gameplay seemed like select a ship & right click another to attack so this
should guarentee that it won't be like Imperial glory in ship use, although I guess
that there could be automatic & manual use (select a ship & right click another to attack
& they fight as automatic, tell ur ship do swim along the enemy ship & open fire on ur command
as manual). Well I hope that it is both manual & automatic use anyway, because automatic could
be boring alone if only 2 ships were fighting & they end up spiralling around each other, on the
other hand manual use would be too difficult for the -20+ ships that can be deployed in
Empire, unlike Imperial Glory.

Nice trailer anyway.

[Herkus]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

For Russians and Swedes too. Galleys saw some action in Baltic sea during Great Northern War.

[PBI]

I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots), neither of whom used galleys or galleyasses AFAIK. My understanding is that they were only practical in the relatively calmer seas of the Mediterranean (and apparently, the Baltic).

Oar-powered galleys I would hope must surely be in, for the inevitable Classical Greece mod.

[Sheogorath]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's. Despite being pretty small (considering their position) they usually kept their navy in the right era, at least.
During the 1700's the Russians were probably the greatest users of oar-powered ships, since Peter the Great built several fleets of them in his wars with the Ottomans and Swedes.

For Russians and Swedes too. Galleys saw some action in Baltic sea during Great Northern War.

I know the Russians were using galleys at the very least up until the Napoleonic Wars. Not in major combat roles, but I can certainly see where they could be quite useful in fairly calm waters.

I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots), neither of whom used galleys or galleyasses AFAIK. My understanding is that they were only practical in the relatively calmer seas of the Mediterranean (and apparently, the Baltic).

Oar-powered galleys I would hope must surely be in, for the inevitable Classical Greece mod.

Ah, I hope so. I guess they really just arent as impressive as those battleships :P

It'd be really interesting if you could specify the number of guns on your ship. For each particular hull-style, more guns would mean more firepower, but less speed, and a tendency to capsize in bad weather. I gather that, up until the Napoleonic Era, 66 and 74 gun designs were most common, with 74 gun ships being regarded as the best balance.
'Though some crazy Spaniards decided to cram 120 guns onto a ship, which then spent most of its life in a harbor as a floating battery, since it had roughly the speed and maneuverability of your average three-legged, one-eyed, tortoise.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's. Despite being pretty small (considering their position) they usually kept their navy in the right era, at least.
During the 1700's the Russians were probably the greatest users of oar-powered ships, since Peter the Great built several fleets of them in his wars with the Ottomans and Swedes.

The North African corsairs, nominally Ottomans, still preferred galleys for their manoeuvrability and speed that was quite sufficient to conduct raids and piracy. One of the few operators of rowed warships to actually use galley slaves.

I know the Russians were using galleys at the very least up until the Napoleonic Wars. Not in major combat roles, but I can certainly see where they could be quite useful in fairly calm waters.

Quit the opposite, the Baltic is quite rough. The reason galleys remained in service there for far longer then most places was that it was quite narrow. With little sea room to tack you could spend weeks at anchor waiting for the wind to blow your way. Also, oars allowed you to get to shelter before a storm hit, whereas a sailing-vessel might not be so lucky and had to ride the storm out. The seas being narrow meant you would risk being blown onto shore.

[hoom]

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's.

Hmm, it seems I was incorrectly thinking Lepanto was later than it actually was

[Sheogorath]

The North African corsairs, nominally Ottomans, still preferred galleys for their manoeuvrability and speed that was quite sufficient to conduct raids and piracy. One of the few operators of rowed warships to actually use galley slaves.

Aye, but pirate ships aren't the same as warships. Pirates want loot and prisoners. A warship is just out there to kill things.

Quit the opposite, the Baltic is quite rough. The reason galleys remained in service there for far longer then most places was that it was quite narrow. With little sea room to tack you could spend weeks at anchor waiting for the wind to blow your way. Also, oars allowed you to get to shelter before a storm hit, whereas a sailing-vessel might not be so lucky and had to ride the storm out. The seas being narrow meant you would risk being blown onto shore.

If I remember correctly, the Baltic is also possessed of a rather large number of fjords and so forth, with lots of swamps and shallow-water areas which would be quite fine for a galley to operate in, while being exceedingly difficult (or impossible) for a conventional warship to follow in.

Hmm, it seems I was incorrectly thinking Lepanto was later than it actually was

Wikipedia says 1571 :p
And goes on to state that the first Ottoman battleship was purchased in 1624.

[rajpoot]

'Though some crazy Spaniards decided to cram 120 guns onto a ship, which then spent most of its life in a harbor as a floating battery, since it had roughly the speed and maneuverability of your average three-legged, one-eyed, tortoise.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but was under the impression that most of the first rate, larger warships had more than 100 guns......no?

[pevergreen]

I thought so, I remember something about 128-gun ships.

[Sheogorath]

I thought so, I remember something about 128-gun ships.

The Ottomans built a 128-gun ship some time in the 1840's, I believe. The French built the largest ship of the line ever (with 120 guns) in the 1850's. As I recall, it was also essentially useless and ended up as a floating battery or something.
But, for the purposes of this game, the Spanish 'Santísima Trinidad' (built 1769) would be the largest ship. Probably ever at that point. The French built some 120-gun ships later, too though.
And, according to Wikipedia, they decided it'd be a good idea to slap a FOURTH deck on to make it 140 guns. Apparently her nickname was 'El Ponderoso'.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but was under the impression that most of the first rate, larger warships had more than 100 guns......no?

Yes, but there's a point where you just cant add more guns without sacrificing too much mobility. Hence why 74-gun ships were so popular.

[Pantsalot]

I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots)

I think I also saw a Monarch-Spanish flag in it. Though I have bad eyesight & I have only watched
this once so any1 is up for correcting me. Who knows if one of those English flags were actually
a Georgian-Russo flag? a bigger question is who cares, although I would prefer if they put another
faction into their videos, getting a bit dull with the Brits vs US even though I know they r trying
to appeal to the American audience they should also keep all of us Europeans on their side. Why
not a Swedish fleet vs Russian?

[Sheogorath]

I think I also saw a Monarch-Spanish flag in it. Though I have bad eyesight & I have only watched
this once so any1 is up for correcting me. Who knows if one of those English flags were actually
a Georgian-Russo flag? a bigger question is who cares, although I would prefer if they put another
faction into their videos, getting a bit dull with the Brits vs US even though I know they r trying
to appeal to the American audience they should also keep all of us Europeans on their side. Why
not a Swedish fleet vs Russian?

The Russian Naval Jack is actually very similar to the 'Stars and Bars' of the Confederacy. Less the stars, of course. Its pretty recognizable. The ensign is a blue 'x' cross on white (Think the Scottish flag, but with the colors reversed). I dont think Georgia even had a navy at the time of this game, since they were an Ottoman protectorate.

They're probably just keeping the other factions 'under wraps' as it were, so they have something else to put out in videos to keep the rabid fanboys strung along ;)

[Dradem]

I know this isn't new but I didn't find a thrread about it.
Intrepid Sidekick said that there was a new video out but didn't find it so went for a look.

Since I made this post there has also been a preview trailer including actual naval battle footage. There are 4 other movies coming.
Anyway I have to get back to the coal face of game development.

http://www.eurogamer.net/tv_video.ph...113&size=large


It looks amazing

Is there a set schedule for the remaining four movies, IS? Or are you just releasing them "whenever they get done"?

[pevergreen]

Egads, but I thought the exact same thing this time two years ago, looking at M2TW.

My fanboy flag will not be raised for trailers, only speculation! (Main reason being all the sites these trailers are on seem to hate me, they wont work most of the time)

From the little I saw, very impressed.

[Monk]

Looks very impressive.

[CBR]

Teh old: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=106667


CBR

[Celtic_Punk]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH im giddy like a little school girl!

[Martok]

Threads merged.

[eddeduck]

Yes very nice and i cant wait to play.

I just wish the ship models were as good as in Pirates of the burning sea, compared to that the TW ships are very ugly.

note wanted to post a picture but too nooob trust me my 2ndrate is gorgeous

[Rhyfelwyr]

Looking stunning.

Just don't forget about the little matter of land battles CA...