Empire: Total War review - experience thread

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

I just had my entire veteran Caribbean brigade wiped out by the freakin' Pueblo... rather irksome. They're just damn near immune to musket volleys, and the idiot artillery AI is totally worthless. I set them up on a ridge with a pretty commanding view and an utterly lethal kill-zone... once I switched them to canister shot I think they killed all of, oh, 3 enemy warriors because they can't hit shit, especially at point blank range.

On the plus side, I like the improvements to the "RPG" aspects to the game. That I was so attached to said unit - McDowell's Brigade (I name each general's bodyguard the name of the army, which is as good a place as any for an army name) - is itself pretty significant.

[loomer]

I had a unit like that back in Medieval 2, as the British. Plain old Longbowmen unit that fought through three crusades without ever being wiped out, suppressed the Scottish, took part in the sack of Constaninople, single handedly put down a revolt, and even managed to hold their own in the New World. By the end, every single man in that unit had been replaced at least twice. It came out of a lot of battles at only five or six men left - and kept fighting throughout entire campaigns at that size, succesfully.

I lost them in the end, along with one of my dearest generals, the Prince, when a storm took out the fleet that was sailing back to finish off the French. I nearly cried.

[Lazarus]

Funny. CA managed to keep to historical facts in M:TW and VI, but then I guess there wasn't an audience for those either and the efforts made there were unreasonable as well, right?

You're still missing my point. I know that you think that the effort made for realism in ETW is unreasonably low, what I'm saying is that CA should not have to take your view into account as the average player of a TW game since you clearly have higher standards than average.

As for whether MTW was more accurate, I find this hard to believe given that the game works on standardisation and every unit of a type looking identical, when in reality Medieval armies had little in the way of uniforms. In a comparison of 100 identical knights vs 100 identical line infantry, the latter is obviously more realistic.

Please list them.

The names are Russian and I can't be bothered running the game then exiting it to list them, but there's russian melee militia, russian cavalry militia, russian musketeers, plus i'm told cossacks of several forms. At the very least 5 specific units.

That is a joke, right?

Please note my use of the word 'enough', i.e enough so that any average gamer's SOD isn't breached.

Newsflash - neither get the Spanish. Continue.

Neither get the Spanish? What?

And I find it funny that you, with your very limited knowledge based largely on fiction which is not even about the 17th century (alright, the very last years are included) try to declare yourself any kind of authority on the accuracy of the game.

You're clearly not paying any attention to what I'm actually saying because this is the exact opposite of what I've just said. I'm not any kind of authority, that's my point, the vast majority of the audience aren't either and will be perfectly satisfied with the level of realism attained. I don't doubt that you are very well-read on the period, and it is exactly this which negates your view as that of the average gamer. I'm sure the realism of ETW isn't high enough to satisfy 18th century buffs, but that's really not much of a criticism given such people make up a tiny percentage of the game's audience. Call of Duty 5 is pretty unrealistic and won't reach the standards of WWII experts, is that a reasonable criticism? Like bollocks it is.

Are you telling me that reading an 80-page book is too much of an effort?

Oh yeah cos yano, that's all it would take to implement realistic sailing mechanics, accurately model the armies to your standards etc.

How do you justify steamships, btw?

Yeah fair enough even I raised an eyebrow at that.

So media exposure makes them the best? That is a very poor argument.

Yeah it is, hence why I didn't make it. Next time try to suppress your indignant rage and read the post properly.
I'm saying that the media exposure focusing on the British Army in the 18th century is massively greater than that of the nations which have received fewer units, such as Sweden. Thus, there is a much greater demand for effort on the British Army than, say, the Swedish army. CA have a finite amount of resources, and have allocated them according to demand. The demand for an accurately represented Swedish Army simply isn't there to anything like the same degree as the British Army. The developers have to have regard to the demands of their audience, and not expend time and money on putting in features that only a tiny proportion of customers care about. It's called good business practice.

I guess that from now on, any game about World War II should always claim the US Army was the be-all end-all of all armies in all theaters of the conflict, because hey, Americans always get 90% of the media exposure. Anybody criticizing that approach would obviously be unreasonable, right?

Yeah sure, cos yano there's like zero exposure of the other armies right? There's just NO films, tv series', books and games about armies other than the US Army? Most people don't know what German soldiers look like huh?
Your analogy is pathetic.

Yep. How dare you question Lazarus? He has seen TV shows on the subject.

Hey, yeah, here's an idea, why don't I just be sarcastic and ignore his point? That's an awesome plan, and it'll make me look dead smart too. Genius.

[Thanas]

Funny. CA managed to keep to historical facts in M:TW and VI, but then I guess there wasn't an audience for those either and the efforts made there were unreasonable as well, right?

You're still missing my point. I know that you think that the effort made for realism in ETW is unreasonably low, what I'm saying is that CA should not have to take your view into account as the average player of a TW game since you clearly have higher standards than average.

Nice backpedaling. So once again, reading an 80 pg. book is unreasonable effort for a game that is about history? Heck, reading wikipedia is an unreasonable effort?

As for whether MTW was more accurate, I find this hard to believe given that the game works on standardisation and every unit of a type looking identical, when in reality Medieval armies had little in the way of uniforms. In a comparison of 100 identical knights vs 100 identical line infantry, the latter is obviously more realistic.

Those were limits of technology and the unit descriptions mention quite often that there was no generic infantry etc.

Please list them.

The names are Russian and I can't be bothered running the game then exiting it to list them, but there's russian melee militia, russian cavalry militia, russian musketeers, plus i'm told cossacks of several forms. At the very least 5 specific units.

And their names are....?

That is a joke, right?

Please note my use of the word 'enough', i.e enough so that any average gamer's SOD isn't breached.

Funny. Even someone who has seen Hornblower should recognize that the Spanish uniforms are not correct.

Newsflash - neither get the Spanish. Continue.

Neither get the Spanish? What?

Just countering your idiotic claim that it is alright for Britain to have more special units since they don't get them at the beginning.

And I find it funny that you, with your very limited knowledge based largely on fiction which is not even about the 17th century (alright, the very last years are included) try to declare yourself any kind of authority on the accuracy of the game.

You're clearly not paying any attention to what I'm actually saying because this is the exact opposite of what I've just said. I'm not any kind of authority, that's my point, the vast majority of the audience aren't either and will be perfectly satisfied with the level of realism attained. I don't doubt that you are very well-read on the period, and it is exactly this which negates your view as that of the average gamer. I'm sure the realism of ETW isn't high enough to satisfy 18th century buffs, but that's really not much of a criticism given such people make up a tiny percentage of the game's audience. Call of Duty 5 is pretty unrealistic and won't reach the standards of WWII experts, is that a reasonable criticism? Like bollocks it is.

You're an idiot. It is a game about 18th century history that lets you relive historical events. That is the claim right there.

I am not asking them to cater to my every whim. I am asking them to make a reasonable effort.

Are you telling me that reading an 80-page book is too much of an effort?

Oh yeah cos yano, that's all it would take to implement realistic sailing mechanics, accurately model the armies to your standards etc. [/quote]

As far as modeling armies - yes, it would. For example, 135 plates of high-quality drawings are available for a little more than 10$ for spain, detailing almost every regiment in the spanish army. Link.

Furthermore, Knötels uniformenkunde, which details every military uniform of that period, is available in any decent university library. Or you can buy the 500 page version for 12 Euro on amazon.

Oops.

So media exposure makes them the best? That is a very poor argument.

Yeah it is, hence why I didn't make it. Next time try to suppress your indignant rage and read the post properly.
I'm saying that the media exposure focusing on the British Army in the 18th century is massively greater than that of the nations which have received fewer units, such as Sweden. Thus, there is a much greater demand for effort on the British Army than, say, the Swedish army. CA have a finite amount of resources, and have allocated them according to demand. The demand for an accurately represented Swedish Army simply isn't there to anything like the same degree as the British Army. The developers have to have regard to the demands of their audience, and not expend time and money on putting in features that only a tiny proportion of customers care about. It's called good business practice.

Substantiate the claim that the majority of the customers are fans of the British army and view an accurate description of it as more necessary than, say, a description of the French and Prussian army. I am guessing that since the game is not only released in Britain, the majority of customers do not. Obviously, all those french, german, spanish, polish customers all just wait to play the British army.

I guess that from now on, any game about World War II should always claim the US Army was the be-all end-all of all armies in all theaters of the conflict, because hey, Americans always get 90% of the media exposure. Anybody criticizing that approach would obviously be unreasonable, right?

Yeah sure, cos yano there's like zero exposure of the other armies right? There's just NO films, tv series', books and games about armies other than the US Army? Most people don't know what German soldiers look like huh?
Your analogy is pathetic.

You are an idiot. There is not "like zero" exposure of the other armies. TV series about Napoleon have been broadcasted to millions of viewers across the globe. And in case you are now crying "bu-bu-buut that is not the game period", well, yeah, neither is 90% of British media on the subject, as those focus on the revolutionary period.

Heck, even the Patriot showed the french army.

[PeZook]

Yeah sure, cos yano there's like zero exposure of the other armies right? There's just NO films, tv series', books and games about armies other than the US Army? Most people don't know what German soldiers look like huh?
Your analogy is pathetic.

Don't be an idiot. Most Holywood movies and TV Shows only show the Germans as antagonists, which is hardly "media exposure" in the sense that causes people to identify with them. The Nazis get about as much media exposure as KGB goons

[Gaidin]

As far as modeling armies - yes, it would. For example, 135 plates of high-quality drawings are available for a little more than 10$ for spain, detailing almost every regiment in the spanish army. Link.

Furthermore, Knötels uniformenkunde, which details every military uniform of that period, is available in any decent university library. Or you can buy the 500 page version for 12 Euro on amazon.

Oops.

Given the work they've done on previous games, I think it's a fair guess they knew of these resources, maybe even used them to an extent. Just not to the level of detail you desire. The level of effort required wasn't considered worth it, especially considering the time and resources they saved doing the uniforms as they did(single texture per unit, rgb value per faction iirc). Cheesy, yes somewhat, but not game breaking to any but history buffs(oh gawd TWC....oh gawd...).

[Thanas]

Given the work they've done on previous games, I think it's a fair guess they knew of these resources, maybe even used them to an extent. Just not to the level of detail you desire.

So...getting the colours completely wrong is somehow....not using the level of detail I desire?

The level of effort required wasn't considered worth it, especially considering the time and resources they saved doing the uniforms as they did(single texture per unit, rgb value per faction iirc).

So explain to me why they got the colour completely wrong.

[Thanas]

To underscore my point:

Spanish uniforms throughout the 18th century:









Now where do you think CA made any kind of reasonable effort?

And it is not just Spain. Same goes for every faction.

[Gaidin]

So...getting the colours completely wrong is somehow....not using the level of detail I desire?


So explain to me why they got the colour completely wrong.

Fuck if I know how they picked colors for different factions. All I really give a damn about is whether or not I can tell the difference between them and me in a battle, which I can. So I'm happy.

EDIT: Geez that's a fuckton of different uniform colors. Trying to take that all into account would turn a battle from an RTS game into a question of "WHICH ONE IS MINE?!?!" especially if they did that for all factions.

[Thanas]

So...getting the colours completely wrong is somehow....not using the level of detail I desire?


So explain to me why they got the colour completely wrong.

Fuck if I know how they picked colors for different factions. All I really give a damn about is whether or not I can tell the difference between them and me in a battle, which I can. So I'm happy.

Then maybe you should have made that argument from the start, right?

[Gaidin]

Then maybe you should have made that argument from the start, right?

If I really thought my opinion mattered I would've.

On the other hand, the argument I made regarding how the programmers set it up and the resources it used was an actual argument. Now you have both, enjoy them.

[Thanas]

Then maybe you should have made that argument from the start, right?

If I really thought my opinion mattered I would've.

On the other hand, the argument I made regarding how the programmers set it up and the resources it used was an actual argument. Now you have both, enjoy them.

Too bad that none of your arguments made sense. Look at the pictures I provided. Those are standard research materials. Do you think any designer who was concerned about historical accuracy at all would have looked at a white uniform and said: You know what, I'll just make it blue, gold and red?

[Steel]

Too bad that none of your arguments made sense. Look at the pictures I provided. Those are standard research materials. Do you think any designer who was concerned about historical accuracy at all would have looked at a white uniform and said: You know what, I'll just make it blue, gold and red?

I think someone who looked at this one probably would



I'm not concerned about the colours used for unit types (unless they made a unit called redcoats blue or something...) but I would be concerned by a lack of variety in unit types between factions which I regard as having a much larger impact on gameplay.

[Lazarus]

Nice backpedaling. So once again, reading an 80 pg. book is unreasonable effort for a game that is about history? Heck, reading wikipedia is an unreasonable effort?

Right, getting majorly fucked off now, slow down the nerd rage and read my fucking post. So reading a book is all CA would need to do yeah? No money and time spent modelling new uniforms and programming new units? Do you have any idea how long it takes to model and skin just one of those units?

Read very carefully, my argument is thus:

Your standards for this game are those of an 18th century history buff. Given your posted pictures, you apparently expect them to have accurately represented not just one 100% correct uniform, but several variations, for at least 5 unique units for every single playable faction, and no doubt some of the unplayable ones too. You moan about minutae like the Santissima Trinidad being described as a 120 instead of a 140, when even wiki states the 120 figure. These details are all far beyond the notice of the average gamer. The russian army gets Siberian Hunters, Cossack Infantry, Cossack Cavalry, Ataman Cavalry, Gorodskiye Streltsy and Viborniye Streltsy, no less than six unique units, and yet this is still not enough for you. These factors apparently combine to make the game a 'half assed job'.

That you can think these criticisms could possibly represent an average player of ETW is absurd. Don't think the details enough? Fine, but it doesn't mean the game is rubbish, it means you have unreasonably exacting standards.

Funny. Even someone who has seen Hornblower should recognize that the Spanish uniforms are not correct.

Right, so by your pictures the Spanish army was largely clad in white. You don't think maybe the developers thought 'gee that'll make things confusing in a spanish vs french battle' and decided on a different colour on account of they care what the average gamers who would scream bloody murder faced with a white vs white battle say, and they really don't give anything like the same weight to what the 18th-century-history-expert-gamers of the world think?

You're an idiot. It is a game about 18th century history that lets you relive historical events. That is the claim right there.

I am not asking them to cater to my every whim. I am asking them to make a reasonable effort.

No, it's not, because that's a historical simulator. It's a mainstream Real Time Strategy game set in the 18th century. Gameplay comes before historical accuracy, thus why your desire to see the Spanish clad in white is retarded. And they have made a reasonable effort, you want them to make an unreasonably great effort, one which would reduce the accessibility of the game considerably to satisfy the tiny minority of customers like you who throw a tantrum because a ship is listed as having the number of guns it was built with rather than the number it was later modified to carry.

Furthermore, Knötels uniformenkunde, which details every military uniform of that period, is available in any decent university library. Or you can buy the 500 page version for 12 Euro on amazon.

Oops.

Already dealt with your ridiculous claim that meeting your standards would require 'them' to read a book and nothing more.

[Lazarus]

Don't be an idiot. Most Holywood movies and TV Shows only show the Germans as antagonists, which is hardly "media exposure" in the sense that causes people to identify with them. The Nazis get about as much media exposure as KGB goons

Fucks sakes, we're talking about uniforms. How many WWII films have you seen? Which of those featured the German army? Of those, which accurately represented their uniforms and at least some of their equipment? Even the low budget ones will have done a decent job.
Ever seen a film by the name of Stalingrad maybe?
Heard about that one called Valkyrie?
Your analogy fails hard.

[PeZook]

I don't care about the uniforms, actually.

[Artemas]

Just to chime in here, the in-game description that mentions the Santissima Trinidad actually mentions that it was originally a three-deck 120 gun ship, and that AFTER IT WAS REWORKED it was a 136 gun, four-decker.

Furthermore Thanas, modelling the uniforms of various regiments would mean having a seperate uniform for nearly every regiment. That is a HUGE time and money commitment for something like 60+ regiments of Foot alone. Not to mention that the uniforms that were MOST COMMON at, say, 1700 were significantly different by even 1750, let alone 1795.

Also, while I dissaprove of the fellating that CA gave the British, I wouldn't say that they were "second fiddle" except in prestige and perception. British forces regularly performed rather well.



On the actual game:

It seems that they may have brought back the old MTW leader system, where each unit has a commander who can gain traits. I regularly get reports of "Brigadiers" dying or gaing traits. I am sure that I have a commander of Grenadiers somewhere who has a mistress, an ambitious and harassing wife, and tries to escape his life in the bottom of the bottle.

I wish that instead of actually making some of the specific, named regiments unique units, they had just used their fancy new naming system to give them historic names. As in, if I recruit a British Guards regiment, then the first one would be named Grenadier Guards, instead of 1st Guards Regiment or whatever. And then the second would be Coldstream Guards, et cetera until maybe half a dozen units had been made, at which point it reverts to 7th Guards Regiment, and so on. It would have been a perfect way to allow each faction to have specific, elite named regiments, without having to go through the process of creating an entirely new unit. Same would apply to the Black Watch, where only the first is titled Black Watch, and then Camerons, Royal Scots Fusiliers, etc untill names run out and then its back to 15th Highland Regiment.

[Lazarus]

I don't care about the uniforms, actually.

Ok thought you were talking in context of the uniforms point.
Nevertheless, there's a huge presence of the Wehrmarcht in WWII media, perhaps not from their perspective but they feature prominently, and some books/films/series are from their perspective. Name me some 18th century-based media from the perspective of the Swedish army, with a level of detail greater than ETW.

My point is that with TV like Sharpe and books like Bernard Cornwell's series the British Army of the period has a greater presence in the mind of the average ETW purchaser than the other nations, though France is certainly not far behind and Spain probably a close third. This is reflected in more effort being expended on the BE in the game than the other nations.

I might point out that if anyone's played the Grand Campaign the level of US propaganda is sickening, way beyond anything British in the game. It largely consists of George Washington wanking in your face about freedom. I was also slightly disturbed to be asked to attack a Native American settlement, my General saying the 'Slaughter them!' line as he did so...

[RogueIce]

Given the work they've done on previous games, I think it's a fair guess they knew of these resources, maybe even used them to an extent. Just not to the level of detail you desire.

So...getting the colours completely wrong is somehow....not using the level of detail I desire?

The level of effort required wasn't considered worth it, especially considering the time and resources they saved doing the uniforms as they did(single texture per unit, rgb value per faction iirc).

So explain to me why they got the colour completely wrong.

Do you have some screens of the game itself? Because as someone who hasn't yet played ETW but has played RTW and such, my guess is it is along the lines of why the Julii soldiers went around in red, Briton troops all wore blue, etc. If it's different than that, let me know.

And on the whole historical accuracy angle, I can tell you that when I bought Rome, it was to play with Roman Legions manned by actual Roman soldiers. EB and such are nice mods, but fuck it I want legionary troops, not a bunch of barbarian auxilia and fairly limited numbers of my legionary infantry because I haven't jumped through enough 'citizenship' hoops yet in my build queues.

So I imagine when it comes to unit design and selection, TCA is probably catering to gamers like me, rather than the history nuts of, say, TWC and elsewhere. Since we all know the modders are going to go fucking nuts on the historical stuff anyway.

[GuppyShark]

It occurs to me that I haven't even fought Spain, so I don't know what their soldiery looks like. They're probably in red and yellow, if their map colour is any indicator.

[Thanas]

Read very carefully, my argument is thus:

Your standards for this game are those of an 18th century history buff. Given your posted pictures, you apparently expect them to have accurately represented not just one 100% correct uniform, but several variations, for at least 5 unique units for every single playable faction, and no doubt some of the unplayable ones too.

Nope. I would be quite satisfied if they would even get one uniform right per troop type. I would be very satisfied if they had simply used the white uniform.

As for your "point" about this creating a huge extra effort, that is retarded to argue. CA is already spending time skinning them in the wrong way. So why not do it right from the start?

You moan about minutae like the Santissima Trinidad being described as a 120 instead of a 140, when even wiki states the 120 figure.

It is one case of many.

These details are all far beyond the notice of the average gamer. The russian army gets Siberian Hunters, Cossack Infantry, Cossack Cavalry, Ataman Cavalry, Gorodskiye Streltsy and Viborniye Streltsy, no less than six unique units, and yet this is still not enough for you. These factors apparently combine to make the game a 'half assed job'.

Yes, they do. Because no matter how you try to spin it, the heart of the matter is that CA wilfully decided to falsify history.

Don't think the details enough? Fine, but it doesn't mean the game is rubbish, it means you have unreasonably exacting standards.

Do not try to make this about the game mechanics, but if you want to we can talk about hose as well. Native american supermen, anyway? Are you trying to tell me that never came up during beta tests? Or the bug lists? Did they never built first rates and then click on the fleets during beta tests?

Right, so by your pictures the Spanish army was largely clad in white. You don't think maybe the developers thought 'gee that'll make things confusing in a spanish vs french battle' and decided on a different colour on account of they care what the average gamers who would scream bloody murder faced with a white vs white battle say, and they really don't give anything like the same weight to what the 18th-century-history-expert-gamers of the world think?

Hey - they have those huge flags over their heads. Don't you think that would be quite the reminder?

No, it's not, because that's a historical simulator. It's a mainstream Real Time Strategy game set in the 18th century. Gameplay comes before historical accuracy, thus why your desire to see the Spanish clad in white is retarded.

Ah, the old false dilemma. Don't fucking tell me gameplay suffers because the game is historical accurate. Are you familiar with RTR? No?

And they have made a reasonable effort, you want them to make an unreasonably great effort, one which would reduce the accessibility of the game considerably to satisfy the tiny minority of customers like you who throw a tantrum because a ship is listed as having the number of guns it was built with rather than the number it was later modified to carry.

You are an idiot. You keep harping on this one tiny detail of my post but ignore the bigger picture, which is that CA has not even done things that are on the high school level.

Already dealt with your ridiculous claim that meeting your standards would require 'them' to read a book and nothing more.

Oh yes, it would require them to skin units. Which they would have to do anyway.

[Thanas]

It occurs to me that I haven't even fought Spain, so I don't know what their soldiery looks like. They're probably in red and yellow, if their map colour is any indicator.

Spanish infantry:



Spanish infantry according to CA:



That does not qualify as a reasonable effort, that qualifies as pulling things out of ones behind.

[Thanas]

So explain to me why they got the colour completely wrong.

Do you have some screens of the game itself? Because as someone who hasn't yet played ETW but has played RTW and such, my guess is it is along the lines of why the Julii soldiers went around in red, Briton troops all wore blue, etc. If it's different than that, let me know.[/quote]

It is way worse. At least you could recognize Roman soldiers as Roman due to them wearing the same armour etc.

That is not the case anymore, as my example proves.

Also: Hey, Steam has started updating once more. Looks like the third patch after release. Yessir, this game went through a quality betatest before launch.

[RazorOutlaw]

*snip images*

That does not qualify as a reasonable effort, that qualifies as pulling things out of ones behind.

As someone who played the Spanish, first, when Medieval 2 was released, I can say that those musketeers have nearly the same color scheme. At best the trousers are different (where the others had mail or a tunic covering the legs). I could only guess as to why - consistency to avoid confusion, maybe?

Anyway, I'm glad I waited. In the past I never really had any trouble with bugs as someone people have (no CTDs, units seem to work fine, etc.) so I was quick to say that anybody who did have a gripe (historical or bug-wise) was just being pissy. Since Medieval 2 it's kind been hard to ignore the evidence of sloppiness on CA's part. A third patch and it's hardly been ten days? I'd hate to see them if they finally start getting some competition - hopefully most of this bullshit will stop.

[AniThyng]

Something is fucked up with the way it arranges armies for seige sally's - I am beseiging an enemy fortress from the south, but when they sally out, I am positioned in the north? Jesus this should be obvious from turn 2 of the american campaign!