First Impressions

[A Very Super Market]

Well the armies and navies are always really small in TW games.

At first. Milan

[knoddy]

i still havnt figured out how to promote a general/admiral is it just the buy admiral feature in the bottom right of the army pane? that costs like 1500 or is there a way to do it without buying?

Cheers knoddy

ps sorry for hte hijack :P

[Murmandamus]

I'm loving the game, but my first assault on a fort was an AI disaster. 800 defenders vs 1100 attackers. I think I took 30 odd casualties and only a handful of the enemy escaped.

The AI started with its artillery outside the fort all on its own in the middle of a forest. So they just sat there pounding at the trees until I sent a unit in to mop them up.

It had 1 other unit outside the walls, also in a useless position, which was quickly dealt with.

My artillery had been pounding away at the gate all this time to no apparent effect, so I switched them to the wall instead, which they ended up breaching in a 1/4 of the time that they'd spent on the gate.

External units dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the brave enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one foolhardy unit. So I arrange a semicircle of 9 of my units to greet them, which it marches straight into the middle of.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the unconventional enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the insane enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the retarded enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

I think you can see the pattern here. When I finally made my assault on the fort there were only 2 enemy units left + the general. It didn't occupy any of the buildings in the fort, didn't try to defend the breach in the wall, didn't even keep its remaining units together. It just bent over and took it.

I think I need to crank the difficulty slider and try again. I've never seen the AI do that badly in previous titles :)

[Hooahguy]

Murmandamus- what difficulty level were you at?

[Murmandamus]

Murmandamus- what difficulty level were you at?

Whatever the default is :)

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

The AI doesn't understand forts, from what I hear.

[PanzerJaeger]

And so it begins...

[Kongeslask]

- Started a "long" Grand Campaign as France, normal/normal. A few turns in Wurtemberg declares war on me for no apparent reason. The next turn Savoie does them same, again seemingly unmotivated. I invade and defeat Wurtemberg easily.

- In 1705 my monarch dies. I get a message about a war of succession starting. Austria and German minor allies Westphalia and Bavaria, the United provinces and Britain all declare war on me. I call on my Spanish allies. By 1710 I have taken Westphalia and the Netherlands region, knocking the UP out of the game. They are quite rebellious though and will probably revolt soon. In this time the only attacks against me are some tiny, ineffectual invasions by Bavaria and Savoie. Britain has hit my shipping hard, but this is thus far only a nuisance. My ally Spain has proved entirely ineffectual, marching small bands back and forth through their territory.

- AI leaves its batteries entirely undefended in field battles, making them easy prey for my lancers.

Haven't played further yet, but this does not bode well for the prowess of either the strategic or tactical AI.

[A Very Super Market]

Bah, hard is always the way to go.

[Gregoshi]

And so it begins...

Kosh?! Is that you?

[Necceh]

The AI hasn't been all that impressive, i'm usually not all that when it comes to strategy, i've been using a standard flanking approach, that i've used in other Total War Games and it seems to have worked fairly easily.

That being said i've only got it set on default, i'll crank it up on the next game :).

I love the game though, had a bit of a geek moment lastnight. Listening to Battlestar Galatacia sound track and had my infantry charge a line of Ottomons with the speed set to slo-motion, was a jaw dropping moment for me, rarely seen in games these days.

The campaign map is okay, but after playing EU3 it seems quite basic and yes it's really hard to spot certain units and so on.


Overall the game is fantastic, and despite some negative coments here i love it, these were simply me nit picking, hate it when i do that.

[ArtillerySmoke]

I'm loving the game, but my first assault on a fort was an AI disaster. 800 defenders vs 1100 attackers. I think I took 30 odd casualties and only a handful of the enemy escaped.

The AI started with its artillery outside the fort all on its own in the middle of a forest. So they just sat there pounding at the trees until I sent a unit in to mop them up.

It had 1 other unit outside the walls, also in a useless position, which was quickly dealt with.

My artillery had been pounding away at the gate all this time to no apparent effect, so I switched them to the wall instead, which they ended up breaching in a 1/4 of the time that they'd spent on the gate.

External units dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the brave enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one foolhardy unit. So I arrange a semicircle of 9 of my units to greet them, which it marches straight into the middle of.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the unconventional enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the insane enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

That unit dealt with it was time to assault the fort, but wait, do my eyes deceive me or is the retarded enemy bring the fight out to me? No, it's just sending one more foolhardy unit into the semicircle of doom.

I think you can see the pattern here. When I finally made my assault on the fort there were only 2 enemy units left + the general. It didn't occupy any of the buildings in the fort, didn't try to defend the breach in the wall, didn't even keep its remaining units together. It just bent over and took it.

I think I need to crank the difficulty slider and try again. I've never seen the AI do that badly in previous titles :)

Guess you never played RTW or M2TW. The battle AI was attrocious.

[AussieGiant]

I remember saying this a bloody long time ago many many games ago.

Before anyone start hammering the AI, make sure you are playing on VH/VH...otherwise it MIGHT be by actual DESIGN that you are winning.

Crapping on the AI while on M/M is like a Polar Bear complaining that Australia is too hot in summer.

[andrewt]

I'm not familiar with this time period, but I'm a bit disappinted that the unit rosters are very similar. Then again, MTW2's isn't that great, either. They mostly just had different names for essentially the same units. I kinda miss MTW where almost every faction has 1-2 specialized units that nobody else has that gives it an advantage.

It seems towns and units are harder to spot in the campaign map as well. And there's no option to see stuff like income permanently on the game map. You have to mouse over the town name. Other than that, the new campaign map looks really promising.

[Sir Beane]

I'm not familiar with this time period, but I'm a bit disappinted that the unit rosters are very similar. Then again, MTW2's isn't that great, either. They mostly just had different names for essentially the same units. I kinda miss MTW where almost every faction has 1-2 specialized units that nobody else has that gives it an advantage.

It seems towns and units are harder to spot in the campaign map as well. And there's no option to see stuff like income permanently on the game map. You have to mouse over the town name. Other than that, the new campaign map looks really promising.

It's historical. During the 18th century everyone used more or less the same units, with uniform and technology being the only variations. It makes the game more balanced at least .

I'd like to see more variety though, and hopefully the moders can help us there .

[ArtillerySmoke]

I remember saying this a bloody long time ago many many games ago.

Before anyone start hammering the AI, make sure you are playing on VH/VH...otherwise it MIGHT be the by actual DESIGN that you are winning.

Crapping on the AI while on M/M is like a Polar Bear complaining that Australia is too hot in summer.

I've seen posts about M2TW with people complaining that the AI is "too easy" on the easiest difficulties, but yet it never occurred to them that they're playing on sandbox mode.

The AI is supposed to be dumb as rocks on the easiest difficulties.

[AussieGiant]

I've seen posts about M2TW with people complaining that the AI is "too easy" on the easiest difficulties, but yet it never occurred to them that they're playing on sandbox mode.

The AI is supposed to be dumb as rocks on the easiest difficulties.

Exactly!!

[Murmandamus]

Guess you never played RTW or M2TW. The battle AI was attrocious.

I've played them all and I've never seen it do anywhere near that badly, which is what led me to post about it :)

I cranked the battle AI to full strength and it did a much better job at fort defense. Different fight, but I lost about 500 out of 1500 this time, though that was partly my own fault. The enemy had cannon inside the fort and they blew up a wall section that I had a unit on before I noticed what they were doing. Trying to assault 3 sides of the fort at the same time gets a bit hectic. Lost 100 men when the wall went down. Cool seeing the AI blow up its own fort to defend it. I'd do the same :)

My second mistake was taking out 2 sections of one of the walls. With the small fort, when you take down a section of wall it also takes out the stairs that lead up to the wall. The enemy had about 4 units up on the front wall. I took out both wall sections either side of the gate which left 3 1/2 units stuck up there in the middle section.

That was fine in one respect because it meant they couldn't get down to defend when I charged in, but it also meant that they had a good position to shoot down on me, and I couldn't get up to them unless I wanted heavy losses. I ended up winning via holding the center square for the countdown with 300 or so of the enemy still stuck up on the wall. First time I've ever had to win a siege battle via countdown in a TW game. I usually do my best to kill all the enemy instead :)

I also very nearly ran out of money which looks like it will cause problems in this game. Previously you'd just go negative balance, but I got a warning when I hit the end turn button saying that if I continued I'd run out of money, that a bunch of units would disband due to not getting paid and that citizens could riot. Luckily I had just started the above siege which was to take a French province, so I was able to just do the attack and take the province which increased my income enough to cover my army upkeep costs :)

[ArtillerySmoke]

I've played them all and I've never seen it do anywhere near that badly, which is what led me to post about it :)

I cranked the battle AI to full strength and it did a much better job at fort defense. Different fight, but I lost about 500 out of 1500 this time, though that was partly my own fault. The enemy had cannon inside the fort and they blew up a wall section that I had a unit on before I noticed what they were doing. Trying to assault 3 sides of the fort at the same time gets a bit hectic. Lost 100 men when the wall went down. Cool seeing the AI blow up its own fort to defend it. I'd do the same :)

My second mistake was taking out 2 sections of one of the walls. With the small fort, when you take down a section of wall it also takes out the stairs that lead up to the wall. The enemy had about 4 units up on the front wall. I took out both wall sections either side of the gate which left 3 1/2 units stuck up there in the middle section.

That was fine in one respect because it meant they couldn't get down to defend when I charged in, but it also meant that they had a good position to shoot down on me, and I couldn't get up to them unless I wanted heavy losses. I ended up winning via holding the center square for the countdown with 300 or so of the enemy still stuck up on the wall. First time I've ever had to win a siege battle via countdown in a TW game. I usually do my best to kill all the enemy instead :)

I also very nearly ran out of money which looks like it will cause problems in this game. Previously you'd just go negative balance, but I got a warning when I hit the end turn button saying that if I continued I'd run out of money, that a bunch of units would disband due to not getting paid and that citizens could riot. Luckily I had just started the above siege which was to take a French province, so I was able to just do the attack and take the province which increased my income enough to cover my army upkeep costs :)

Sounds good.

The zero negative balance is also phenomenal imo. I always thought the negative balance was a joke. You have to feed your soldiers or your campaign is over.

[IsItStillThere]

Well the armies and navies are always really small in TW games.

At first. Milan

True, and its understandable on the land battles. You can only control (and the computer render) so many men at once in a battle. So I can understand understating numbers of men.

And for naval battles, the forces are limited to 20 ships a side. Fair enough. But to pretend that in 1700 that the major nations had no ships of the line?! Ridiculous. How about Britain and France starting off with a couple of fleets of ten each? Would that be so wrong?

BTW, while there is a discussion going on about difficulty, does anyone know what happens on hard and very hard to help the AI? Do they get smarter, get bonuses or both? In the ideal world, I'd like them to be as smart as possible without getting a lot of bonuses.

[Nelson]

True, and its understandable on the land battles. You can only control (and the computer render) so many men at once in a battle. So I can understand understating numbers of men.

And for naval battles, the forces are limited to 20 ships a side. Fair enough. But to pretend that in 1700 that the major nations had no ships of the line?! Ridiculous. How about Britain and France starting off with a couple of fleets of ten each? Would that be so wrong?

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this. From Shogun onward CA has been determined to make us tech up to get what was already available at the campaign start date. In Rome, by the time you can build triarii you are almost to Marius despite the obvious historical existence of the entire manipular legion when the game begins. Ah well. This may be how they choose to balance the factions.

[Sir Beane]

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of this. From Shogun onward CA has been determined to make us tech up to get what was already available at the campaign start date. In Rome, by the time you can build triarii you are almost to Marius despite the obvious historical existence of the entire manipular legion when the game begins. Ah well. This may be how they choose to balance the factions.

The factions don't really need balancing too much, as they all have near indentical unit rosters.

Giving facions first rates at the start would invalidate the naval tech tree, because a lot of it needs to be researched to build them. And then of course there's the fact you need a top-level shipyard as well.

It's irritating, but I can understand where CA is coming from. Teching up gives you a sense of progress and accomplishment which would be missing if all the tech was available from the start.

It's one of those tricky realism vs. gameplay issues .

[Nelson]

It's one of those tricky realism vs. gameplay issues .

Bingo, Sir Beane!

I have installed the game along with the special forces and the USS Constitution (from Best Buy) but have only played some of the American tutorial thus far. I like it.

[Eusebius86]

Here's my initial impression as I just picked up the game from gamestop today. I made sure to restart my pc after installing ETW, so no CTD's or errors. No steam problems whatsoever. Also, load times about 1/2 of the demo's.
- Lots of people on the twcenter forums complaining about the graphics being too intensive compared to the demo, I haven't had any problems on high settings, 1440x900 res, grass low (9800 gt, 2.5 Ghz dual core, 2GB ram XP).
- Graphics are great on campaign and battles, almost flawless.
- Have had 1 CTD after 3 hours of play, not too bad
- am po'd that I can't delete save games, as I'm constantly saving games because I'm concerned about CTD's...
- RtI campaign is long a REALLY LONG tutorial, kind of boring. And I'm a huge American Revolution fan. I wish I could change the settings to VH for RtI, but you can't...
- Battle AI is great in open field, I almost lost General Washington to an ambush which was almost flawlessly executed by the AI.
- Siege AI is possibly WORSE than RTW and M2TW. Pathfinding sucks, AI sits around all day doing nothing, etc. I hate it and autoresolve every single siege now...
- I may quit the RtI campaign and jump in to the Grand Campaign as Prussia or Great Britain soon. It's not quite as immersive as I hoped it would be. Maybe it's just because there are so many sieges, and I'm absolutely hating the siege AI...

[IlDuce]

The factions don't really need balancing too much, as they all have near indentical unit rosters.

Giving facions first rates at the start would invalidate the naval tech tree, because a lot of it needs to be researched to build them. And then of course there's the fact you need a top-level shipyard as well.

It's irritating, but I can understand where CA is coming from. Teching up gives you a sense of progress and accomplishment which would be missing if all the tech was available from the start.

It's one of those tricky realism vs. gameplay issues .

Defo agree with you on the sense of achievement from teching up. The first battle with Fire by rank was awesome. The cherokee charging at me like usual, probably cocky that they'd do some good damage. Then they rout before they even clash with me. Nothing like slaughtering the natives with superior firepower.

[ArtillerySmoke]

Defo agree with you on the sense of achievement from teching up. The first battle with Fire by rank was awesome. The cherokee charging at me like usual, probably cocky that they'd do some good damage. Then they rout before they even clash with me. Nothing like slaughtering the natives with superior firepower.

Do the natives wage guerilla warfare as they should? As in, unconventional?

[Sir Beane]

Do the natives wage guerilla warfare as they should? As in, unconventional?

They do tend to raid surrounding unprotected towns and run if they don't think they can take you in a straight fight. I was sitting in a fort waiting for them but they torched all my plantations and the legged it back into friendly territory. (The they I am talking about is the Cherokee.)

[IsItStillThere]

The factions don't really need balancing too much, as they all have near indentical unit rosters.

Giving facions first rates at the start would invalidate the naval tech tree, because a lot of it needs to be researched to build them. .

Then why not start the naval tech tree where it actually was in 1700 and go from there? Let us, the players, change history instead of doing it for us.

Don't get me wrong, the game is great and will still be a lot of fun...but it would have been even better to have a historically realistic starting point.

[A Very Super Market]

Well.... basically all the units were researched in 1700.

[Quickening]

Ive just uploaded my first impressions video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQcjBkpHSlE