Empires Total WAR!

[Calax]

Except it isn't in Aisa. It's set during the 1700-1800's and will be primairly about building an empire....

 

 

Thats all I got.

 

 

http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/21848...-Total-War.html

[Tigranes]

Well, I hoped it would be set in Asia, but this was probably the most likely setting.

 

From skimming, the welcome point of usable buildings on the combat map is noted; hopefully the strategic map has more of a tactical element as well, i.e. the ability to build forts on the strat map and defend chokepoints properly (instead of having everyone just run past you a la RTW/MTW2). Naval battles look nice too, though this will kill my computer.

 

But as always, the make or break will be whether they manage to make the AI even remotely acceptable, finally.

[Kaftan Barlast]

IMO, this new TW takes place in the most exciting historical time period in Europe, just the setting Ive always wanted. I know its going to be the most awesome TW game thus far, you've got naval battles, guns, and you can play Sweden. Im excited.

 

 

And Asia?! What, you want tentacle troopers and sailor-moon cohorts? Phh..

Edited January 2, 2008 by Kaftan Barlast

[Tigranes]

But Kaftan, doesn't every gamer dream of the day when they may command legions of tentacle troopers, watching in awe as each and every tentacle are independently animated?

 

It is a good period, I'm very curious about how they are going to make combat against the natives interesting though. Surely this means a great change from the older TW maps, which were basically big empty fields? Surely it means moving slowly through jungles, lots of rivers, shallow streams and bridges and buildings, all of which confer extreme advantages/disadvantages? Now all that with TW armies might well be unique.

[Enoch]

One nice thing about this period is that it pretty much ensures that the early "land grab" portion of the campaign will be eliminated. I don't think they can duplicate the MTW/RTW "rebel states" in 18th century Europe. Since a good run in the land grab pretty much ensured that you'd be able to bully your neighbors for the next couple centuries, this will probably be an improvement in balance.

 

I probably would've preferred an ancient setting like China, but I'm cautiously optimistic that this'll be a worthy game.

[Musopticon?]

I probably would've preferred an ancient setting like China, but I'm cautiously optimistic that this'll be a worthy game.

I agree, an Ancient setting would have been preferable, for instance China, or Japan again, but Colonialism is an interesting period as well.

[Kaftan Barlast]

You people are nothing but a bunch of cranky reactionaries. Here you get the most awesome time period in Europe served on a silver platter and youd rather take China?! Im offended by your blatant lack of taste, you phillistines.

 

 

 

The Duke of Wellington agrees with me:

"Phillistines, bah!"

[Musopticon?]

That's it. I'm gonna play as Denmark and annex every Swedish colony I come across.

[Kaftan Barlast]

That's it. I'm gonna play as Denmark and annex every Swedish colony I come across.

 

 

I think you are projecting your disapointment over the collapse of the Swedish Empire into misdirected anger. It wasnt our fault that everyone bunched up on us until we were too weak to protect Finland from being occupied by the Russkies. Imagine, if things had gone a bit better, you would be speaking a nice indoeurpoean language with germanic roots, instead of that ugrik nonsense with far too many hard consonants.

 

 

Together we could have forced Norway to remain in the union, and thus using their sweet oil to enrichen ourselves. Maybe even invade Poland again?

[Musopticon?]

Well, now that you mention it, I wouldn't have minded to have born into a Swedish-held Pomeranian estate on the continent, living off the lap of luxury in a Bernadottic Empire. Imagine what could have been done, had you just trusted us enough to not fail so utterly after Pultava.

[Gorgon]

This looks interesting, I remember a game called Empires which tackled many of the same gameplay issues, but did so rather poorly. The strongest unit in the game was the humble peasant, which could cut a swath through musketeers with their clubs.

 

It also had no loose formation and no guard formation so after each enemy contact your forces would be facing every which way and you would have to click them all back into place for the next contact. Naval combat was fun, and also completely unmanagable with more than 4 ships at a time.

Edited January 2, 2008 by Gorgon

[Morgoth]

I fear Empire will just be more of the same. Empire: Total Lame - just moah...Not to mention the outrageous system reqs that the game will impose. From a historical standpoint, I personally would have been more interested in 19th century warfare. That would have made a more distinguished experience with Napoleon, national consciousness, effect of Industrialization etc.

[Gorgon]

That game I was thinking of was called Imperial Glory, not Empires. It had all the stuff like taking and holding fixed positions like buildings, naval combat etc.

 

My chief worry in this is that the pace of battles will be so fast you will be playing in increments with the pause button. I certainly hope they fix musketeers.

 

In Kingdoms they automatically turn and face the enemy, which leads to them ending up in random positions voulnerable to enemy mele, pretty useless compared to archers which can be placed anywhere and will shoot over the heads of screening forces and won't turn and ruin their deployment.

Edited January 2, 2008 by Gorgon

[Pidesco]

I think you can order units to hold their ground at all times, Gorgon.

[Kaftan Barlast]

I fear Empire will just be more of the same. Empire: Total Lame - just moah...Not to mention the outrageous system reqs that the game will impose. From a historical standpoint, I personally would have been more interested in 19th century warfare. That would have made a more distinguished experience with Napoleon, national consciousness, effect of Industrialization etc.

 

 

The Total War series are the best strategy games ever, why fix something that aint broke? And ETW does stretch well into the 1800's I dont remember when it ends but Napoleon is definently in there.

[Gorgon]

I think you can order units to hold their ground at all times, Gorgon.

The guard and disable skirmish mode options work for all units in the game except musketeers and arquebusiers, they still turn and face, pulling themselves out of position.

[Morgoth]

I fear Empire will just be more of the same. Empire: Total Lame - just moah...Not to mention the outrageous system reqs that the game will impose. From a historical standpoint, I personally would have been more interested in 19th century warfare. That would have made a more distinguished experience with Napoleon, national consciousness, effect of Industrialization etc.

 

 

The Total War series are the best strategy games ever, why fix something that aint broke? And ETW does stretch well into the 1800's I dont remember when it ends but Napoleon is definently in there.

How far does it stretch into the 1800s? I figure Napoleon would deserve an entire Total War game on it's own. But they probably will make an expansion about him anyway...

[Morgoth]

That game I was thinking of was called Imperial Glory, not Empires. It had all the stuff like taking and holding fixed positions like buildings, naval combat etc.

 

My chief worry in this is that the pace of battles will be so fast you will be playing in increments with the pause button. I certainly hope they fix musketeers.

 

In Kingdoms they automatically turn and face the enemy, which leads to them ending up in random positions voulnerable to enemy mele, pretty useless compared to archers which can be placed anywhere and will shoot over the heads of screening forces and won't turn and ruin their deployment.

Yeah I remember that game. I bought it from the bargain bin. It was a bit too short (just conquered entire Europe in 3 days), but nonetheless very enjoyable. Not as big and complex as the TW series, but well balanced and very atmospheric. I liked it.

[Kools]

I fear Empire will just be more of the same. Empire: Total Lame - just moah...Not to mention the outrageous system reqs that the game will impose. From a historical standpoint, I personally would have been more interested in 19th century warfare. That would have made a more distinguished experience with Napoleon, national consciousness, effect of Industrialization etc.

 

 

The Total War series are the best strategy games ever, why fix something that aint broke? And ETW does stretch well into the 1800's I dont remember when it ends but Napoleon is definently in there.

How far does it stretch into the 1800s? I figure Napoleon would deserve an entire Total War game on it's own. But they probably will make an expansion about him anyway...

 

I'm actually fairly certain, from the press releases I read, that it'll conclude just before Napoleon's rise to power, leaving 19th century warfare either for an expansion or its very own game. Personally, I'm hoping on the latter, since that's far and away the period everyone SHOULD be hitting with their games, yet there aren't any major ones out there that I'm aware of.

 

And all that ancient China stuff...blech.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

W00t, I'm so playing the british \m/.