Napoleon: Total War - Games

Oh you had eight armies, I thought you were facing off with 2. Nevermind.

If I had to manage 10 000 troops on a single battlefield, I would cry.

My main problem with Empires was that you couldn't manually set the amount of money you had in skirmishes like all the others did. I want to fight a puny army with a mega force of fully upgraded guards.

[QUOTE=hurts;16822385]DIY? What's that even mean?[/QUOTE] it means DO IT YOURSELF, translated to perfect the engine your fucking self? bitching never accomplished anything.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;16823790]Creative Assembly should team up with [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_software]Massive Software[/url] for a future Total War game. The Battle of Pavia for example had over 40,000 combatants and no game so far has reached the same amount with 3d. (Cossacks 2 can have 64,000 soldiers in a single battle, but it's 2d)[/QUOTE] Massive isn't even real-time software, it's for film. It takes more processing than your average game does to calculate the results, and even then, you have to wait a while before you can even view anything; it doesn't work things out on the fly.

[QUOTE=angelangel;16829089]If I had to manage 10 000 troops on a single battlefield, I would cry.[/QUOTE] Napoleon gave orders to commanders who gave orders to officers who gave orders to blahblahblah. He just came up with the strategy, and gave the initial orders. The rest was carried out by a good selection of men.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;16833734]it means DO IT YOURSELF, translated to perfect the engine your fucking self? bitching never accomplished anything.[/QUOTE] Well, currently that's impossible as there are no modding tools. At all. Therefore, there is no access to the engine, no way to change the AI, no way to make new models, etc. About as many improvements as can be made have been made.

There serie is shit since empires , anyway. [editline]07:40PM[/editline] [QUOTE=acds;16798030]I must say that out of the Total Wars, Empire was the one I liked the least, it might be because of the factions having very similar troops, or something else, I don't really know.[/QUOTE] Also because melee battles looked shit and the AI was stupid. A total war with post midle age equipment is shit btw.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;16833734]it means DO IT YOURSELF, translated to perfect the engine your fucking self? bitching never accomplished anything.[/QUOTE] I think in this case he means Don't involve yourself.

We need Prehistoric : Total war.

campaign mission : surrender to all enemies

[QUOTE=Ickylevel;16836990]There serie is shit since empires , anyway. [editline]07:40PM[/editline] Also because melee battles looked shit and the AI was stupid. A total war with post midle age equipment is shit btw.[/QUOTE] AI- Retarted Melee animations- Good when they don't fuck up, but only in infantry versus infantry combat. With bayonets. As for the time period, that's only a matter of opinion. There's no real reason a total war in the 18th century wouldn't work- it's that Empires was shoddily made.

Well, it's about to be released.

[QUOTE=Mort and Charon;16798201]UPDATE: Just found out that it is officialy a 'Standalone Exspansion' to E:TW (or Expandalone!) and I hope because of this it will not be sold as a Full price Sequel. Other wise I am quite excited about this release, and cannot wait to beat up those French as Lord Wellington himself in my favourite War era of all time! [editline]08:27PM[/editline] More info here : [url]http://www.computerandvideogames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1518364&sid=8790f9fcb7dba7971dba04d2fef75049[/url][/QUOTE] Duke of Wellington. Formerly known as Arthur Wellesley. Also, what is with all the hate towards Empire: Total War? I absolutely loved it. The time period is great, the combat is fun. Sure, the AI are quite retarded. I once beat an army 3 times my size, cause they all came in with seperate Generals and reinforced each other. So all I had to do was isolate one army then move on to the next. Needless to say, they were butchered. And I only lost a few regiments (I had about 600 men against 3000). Other than that, nothing made me feel more awesome than send my huge navy over to India and conquer it with my redcoats. And I loved commandeering trade routes and owning the seas. I don't know why you guys hate E:TW, I thought it was great, and I can't wait for N:TW. Also, for those saying it's basically the same. It isn't. Before, it was the revolution and liberty of America, this time, it's about the revolution of France and the conquering of the European continent. Completely different campaigns, new maps. Awesome. Though I think it should have been the other way round, seeing as the American revolution only happened after the French revolution. [editline]07:37PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Vronkio;20400609]Well, it's about to be released.[/QUOTE] Also, your mum died.

[QUOTE=KingQ8;20400773] Though I think it should have been the other way round, seeing as the American revolution only happened after the French revolution. [/QUOTE] Uhhh... The French revolution happened in the 1790's and the American one happened in the 1770's?? Also E:TW doesn't focus on the American revolution at all. Sure the tutorial is played with the British settlers and then the American rebels all the way up to 1776 and onward, but the main campaign doesn't even let you play as the U.S., instead focusing on the nations of Europe. (Even India got a playable nation and the Americas didn't, except for the Warpath expansion which is shit).

Someone get it and tell us how it is. I've been debating whether or not to buy it. Looks too scripted, not much variety. Only like five or six factions in the grand campaign? That's just wrong, for a Total War game.

Alexander: Total War had only one, mate. But it still was a pretty fun game.

It's actually pretty good. It's only 40 bucks, and it has all the requested features that Empire missed, plus many fixes and tweaks. I know it sucks to buy a new game to get these features, instead of getting a patch to get them... but Sega could have been "FUCK YOU, BUY OUR NEW GAME WITH NOTHING NEW." Atleast this version works. (:

I'm hoping for Rome 2, next. Didn't enjoy Shogun too much, and Medieval 2 ain't very old.

i miss the HANDS ON feel we had on the games from earlier eras. i don't really like this where you line up and shoot. yes it's fucking epic and awesome, i actually DO like it. but i don't expect this from a total war game. i NEED tactics for armies that are more melee based. and the indians in the game are just too obsolete to satisfy my needs.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;20402890]i miss the HANDS ON feel we had on the games from earlier eras. i don't really like this where you line up and shoot. yes it's fucking epic and awesome, i actually DO like it. but i don't expect this from a total war game. i NEED tactics for armies that are more melee based. and the indians in the game are just too obsolete to satisfy my needs.[/QUOTE] Umm, unless you're a crap General, you usually loose 2-5 volleys (depending on whether the situation allows you to dwindle their numbers because you have superior firepower) then charge in with bayonet. This game is largely based around melee fighting. In that era, you'd normally shoot once or twice then charge in for the kill. [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;20401501]Uhhh... The French revolution happened in the 1790's and the American one happened in the 1770's?? Also E:TW doesn't focus on the American revolution at all. Sure the tutorial is played with the British settlers and then the American rebels all the way up to 1776 and onward, but the main campaign doesn't even let you play as the U.S., instead focusing on the nations of Europe. (Even India got a playable nation and the Americas didn't, except for the Warpath expansion which is shit).[/QUOTE] The American revolution happened after the French revolution. Get your crap right. Americans only revolted when they were promised help from French, when she declared Liberté, égalité, fraternité "Liberty, equality, fraternity (brotherhood)" and this caused the Americans to revolt. She also said that she would help any countries who were held back by England or wanted liberty.

[QUOTE=KingQ8;20403514]The American revolution happened after the French revolution. Get your crap right. Americans only revolted when they were promised help from French, when she declared Liberté, égalité, fraternité "Liberty, equality, fraternity (brotherhood)" and this caused the Americans to revolt. She also said that she would help any countries who were held back by England or wanted liberty.[/QUOTE] No. The French revolution began in 1789. The American one was 1776. One of the real reasons the United States won was because of French support, but it was by no means instigated by the French.

on another note: there were rumors that when you installed N:TW your engine for E:TW would get some updates from N:TW. like graphics enhancements and some optimizations. this sounds far fetched just injecting a fully customized and updated engine onto old content. can anyone confirm?

[QUOTE=KingQ8;20403514] The American revolution happened after the French revolution. Get your crap right. [/QUOTE] :eng99:

[QUOTE=Edthefirst;20403637]No. The French revolution began in 1789. The American one was 1776. One of the real reasons the United States won was because of French support, but it was by no means instigated by the French.[/QUOTE] Oh. That's where I got mixed up. Damn. Sorry guys :p

I was really disappointed with the support for Empire and how long it took for the online campaign so I think I'll give this a miss.

[QUOTE=Pinut;20404467]I was really disappointed with the support for Empire and how long it took for the online campaign so I think I'll give this a miss.[/QUOTE] Same here. Seems that modding possibilities are more limited in NTW compared to Rome and Medieval II.

I'm not a big RTS fan myself, but my brother is. He bought Empire + [I]all[/I] the DLC. So he, of course, had to buy Napoleon. So far he said it's basically an improvement over Empire, but nothing spectacular.

I always thought this would be an expansion. When Empire got released I didn't like it that much, in fact I didn't like it at all. However I tried it again today. Was quite fun but compared to the other Total War games this one is the shittiest.

[QUOTE=KingQ8;20400773]Duke of Wellington. Formerly known as Arthur Wellesley. Also, what is with all the hate towards Empire: Total War? I absolutely loved it. The time period is great, the combat is fun. Sure, the AI are quite retarded. I once beat an army 3 times my size, cause they all came in with seperate Generals and reinforced each other. So all I had to do was isolate one army then move on to the next. Needless to say, they were butchered. And I only lost a few regiments (I had about 600 men against 3000). Other than that, nothing made me feel more awesome than send my huge navy over to India and conquer it with my redcoats. And I loved commandeering trade routes and owning the seas. I don't know why you guys hate E:TW, I thought it was great, and I can't wait for N:TW. Also, for those saying it's basically the same. It isn't. Before, it was the revolution and liberty of America, this time, it's about the revolution of France and the conquering of the European continent. Completely different campaigns, new maps. Awesome. Though I think it should have been the other way round, seeing as the American revolution only happened after the French revolution. [editline]07:37PM[/editline] Also, your mum died.[/QUOTE] No shit, bitch.