[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan]If you like RTS games you absolutely need to get the TW series starting with Rome. You're missing SO much.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, start with Shogun: Total War and then Move onto Rome: Total War (And Barbarian Invasion and Alexander) then Medieval Total War, then Medieval Total War 2 and then MTW2: Kingdoms and then finallly, when it's released Empire: Total War
So still no more specific release date than '2008'?
Can't wait to be british and rape my own heritage so it never existed.
Great RTS, or GREATEST RTS ever made?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new1--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab11--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab16--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab15--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new3--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new4--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab13--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb//GamesRadar/us/Games/E/Empire%20Total%20War/Bulk%20Viewers/2008-05-09/PCG188.feat_empire.grab6--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb//GamesRadar/us/Games/E/Empire%20Total%20War/Bulk%20Viewers/2008-05-09/PCG188.feat_empire.newboat--screenshot.jpg[/img]
from [url]http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/empire-total-war/screenshots/g-20070822164625990074/pic-C5F3FE44-E459-45C5-B408-91FEAC58E455#autoPlay[/url]
Jesus Christ this is the game I have been waiting for. Move over AOE3.
Gamespot seems to think it will be released the same month as Spore, I hope not because that would cause my head to actually explode from having to juggle so much awesomeness.
The game is aparently from about 1700-1815, the defeat of Napoleon. So there will be the American War of Independence obviously.
Naval combat looks amazing though, 40 Ships of the Line squaring up online would be epic. There better be boarding and capturing though or I'll be disapointed. Would suck if pirates captured your shiney new flagship wouldn't it?
I just hope, that since warfare of that period is mostly standing still, shooting and falling they really capture and recreate the panic and fear in the troops. Visible emotions.
[b] Edit: [/b] AOE3 can suck my balls, the troops just kind of blob around them in a semicircle firing every 10 seconds, while cannons act more like tanks and ships sail right through each other.
[b] Edit: [/b] First I'll recreate the British empire, then France, then Sweden, then America. Oh I have plans. :excited:
[b] Edit again: [/b] Charge!
Why never Iceland in video games? We've won all the wars we've gone to, we won Britain with our little fisherboats with spudguns, them having battleships... With 0 casualties on our side.
(Oh, and we've only gone to one war, the cod war, we fought the british over fish. Yeah, like Iraq, minus the casualties.)
Oh boy,I can't wait for the Native American Campaign
*Small Pox Hits*
You are all fucked, Game Over
SWEDEN!
Prussia (Along with their American allies) rightfully owns the world anyway.
Holy shit!
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan]Prussia (Along with their American allies) rightfully owns the world anyway.[/QUOTE]
Pfft.
I'm going to steamroll Europe as the French Republic.
Hopefully the campaign is slowed down some in terms of how much time passes per turn or else you won't have much time to take over the world.
if the game only lasts 150 years, then you would only have 75 turns. (if, as in the default unmodded medieval 2 total war, 1 turn = 2 years)
I'm sure they'll address this, though.
Sweden in the Thirty Years' War, FUCK YEAH! :excited:
[QUOTE=Kentz]
[b] PIRATES ARE INCLUDED! :downs: [/b][/QUOTE]
My penis started to weep joy when it got to this part. :excited:
[QUOTE=Sewer Boy]Hopefully the campaign is slowed down some in terms of how much time passes per turn or else you won't have much time to take over the world.
if the game only lasts 150 years, then you would only have 75 turns. (if, as in the default unmodded medieval 2 total war, 1 turn = 2 years)
I'm sure they'll address this, though.[/QUOTE]
I thought 1 turn was 6 months.
[QUOTE=God of Ashes]I thought 1 turn was 6 months.[/QUOTE]
No, it's two years. however it can be changed by simply editing a .txt file in the total war directory. the lowest possible setting is 1 turn = 6 months. (timescale 0.50, default is 2.00)
Though even when modded I believe characters always age at a constant pace and can't be changed
In Medieval 2, I'm pretty sure there was some sort of bug with the turn time. The season changed 6 months, but the years went forward in 2's or something.
This is the perfect time period for a Total War game. 1500- 1799, Iv'e heard is the era that it takes place in. The formation system is screeming for volleys of musket fire to be used.
[QUOTE=Sewer Boy]No, it's two years. however it can be changed by simply editing a .txt file in the total war directory. the lowest possible setting is 1 turn = 6 months. (timescale 0.50, default is 2.00)
Though even when modded I believe characters always age at a constant pace and can't be changed[/QUOTE]
Confirmed in E:TW 1 turn will be 6 months.
So it ends up being 200 turns or so.
I wonder whether it will suffer from the problem I have with all TW games which is the bloody retarded campaign AI.
Firstly, diplomacy is more or less useless, and entirely retarded in the medieval 2 campaign because for some reason people feel annoyed when I offer them trade rights, despite the fact that all it does is make both of us money.
Secondly, castles are pointless because nobody attacks them, they just siege you until you go out and kick them in the pants, negating any point whatsoever in your having a castle in the first place.
Thirdly, the AI seems to be totally schitzophrenic, they move in and out of your territory and attack your troops with a tiny army, then beg for mercy when you chase them back to paris and burn the place to the ground.
Retards the lot of them, it's like playing against a bunch of toddlers.
The other problem I have is that it takes twenty turns and your entire profit margin to build and upkeep an army big enough to actually capture and hold one province.
[QUOTE=chris0132]I wonder whether it will suffer from the problem I have with all TW games which is the bloody retarded campaign AI.
Firstly, diplomacy is more or less useless, and entirely retarded in the medieval 2 campaign because for some reason people feel annoyed when I offer them trade rights, despite the fact that all it does is make both of us money.
Secondly, castles are pointless because nobody attacks them, they just siege you until you go out and kick them in the pants, negating any point whatsoever in your having a castle in the first place.
Thirdly, the AI seems to be totally schitzophrenic, they move in and out of your territory and attack your troops with a tiny army, then beg for mercy when you chase them back to paris and burn the place to the ground.
Retards the lot of them, it's like playing against a bunch of toddlers.
The other problem I have is that it takes twenty turns and your entire profit margin to build and upkeep an army big enough to actually capture and hold one province.[/QUOTE]
The AI has been a long complaint in the TW series I do hope they give them a brain in Empires as well.
I don't like the online play in Total War it just bores me because it's the same moves every time.
[QUOTE=DanRatherman]This is the perfect time period for a Total War game. 1500- 1799, Iv'e heard is the era that it takes place in. The formation system is screeming for volleys of musket fire to be used.[/QUOTE]
Correction, 1700 to sometime in the early 19th century. You already got a taste of the early 1500s in Medieval II Total War and go play some mods if you want to experience the mid 1500s and 1600s.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan]Great RTS, or GREATEST RTS ever made?
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new1--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab11--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab16--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab15--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new3--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_new4--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/CUDAKITE/PCG188_feat_empire_grab13--screensh.jpg[/img]
[img]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb//GamesRadar/us/Games/E/Empire%20Total%20War/Bulk%20Viewers/2008-05-09/PCG188.feat_empire.grab6--screenshot.jpg[/img]
[img]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb//GamesRadar/us/Games/E/Empire%20Total%20War/Bulk%20Viewers/2008-05-09/PCG188.feat_empire.newboat--screenshot.jpg[/img]
from [url]http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/empire-total-war/screenshots/g-20070822164625990074/pic-C5F3FE44-E459-45C5-B408-91FEAC58E455#autoPlay[/url]
Jesus Christ this is the game I have been waiting for. Move over AOE3.[/QUOTE]
Holy sweet eyegasm Batman. I've wanted an RTS set in this time period on this scale for so, so long.
[QUOTE=chris0132]I wonder whether it will suffer from the problem I have with all TW games which is the bloody retarded campaign AI.
Firstly, diplomacy is more or less useless, and entirely retarded in the medieval 2 campaign because for some reason people feel annoyed when I offer them trade rights, despite the fact that all it does is make both of us money.
Secondly, castles are pointless because nobody attacks them, they just siege you until you go out and kick them in the pants, negating any point whatsoever in your having a castle in the first place.
Thirdly, the AI seems to be totally schitzophrenic, they move in and out of your territory and attack your troops with a tiny army, then beg for mercy when you chase them back to paris and burn the place to the ground.
Retards the lot of them, it's like playing against a bunch of toddlers.
The other problem I have is that it takes twenty turns and your entire profit margin to build and upkeep an army big enough to actually capture and hold one province.[/QUOTE]
As far as sieging the castles go, that's what armies did sometimes back in the middle ages. why fight them when they can just starve? and castles DO have a purpose: you don't have to construct unit producing buildings like a barracks or stables, it basically comes automatically with each stage of the castle, I believe. this is if I give you the benifit of the doubt. I haven't noticed armies doing that.
and the last thing you said, about unit upkeep, i haven't had any problems as long as you manage your cities well enough to make plenty of money. as the holy roman empire i've conquered half of europe already, and i'm still making 10000 coin every turn.
but other than that I strongly agree
I know they used to siege castles and I also know that that is much more intelligent than attacking them, and I do it myself, but it's not [B]fun[/B] to be on the recieving end of a siege. I know castles provide most of your unit production and that the point of them is that they make you choose between a unit production facility in the area and keeping a good economy, but the whole siege mechanic is a lot of fun, you just never get to play it in the campaign as the defenders and there's no point doing it as the attackers.
It doesn't happen all that often but it's happened a few times. Just random sieges that I have to send my local response army to annihilate.
I find that to make a decent number of units you have to spend a few turns producing and rallying them, and that they cost a bomb to upkeep, and then you have to leave them in a town you capture for twenty turns because the place is a shithole and the people end up rebelling if you don't keep beating down on them with your army. I can't build any health or law buildings either, so I suppose I'll just have to sack more cities instead of occupying them, but that annoys me because the place ends up smashed and you have to then pay to rebuild it.
If you're under sieg it gives you plenty of time to send reinforcements from another province, so when they get there attack your attackers, then attack with the army from your castle to cath the enemy in the middle.
I rarely have a town rebelling against me... not really sure what I do, it's been a while since I played it.
I didn't realize it got bumped, thanks for the pictures PVT.Ryan, May I edit them into the info about Empires total war?
[QUOTE=Kentz]I didn't realize it got bumped, thanks for the pictures PVT.Ryan, May I edit them into the info about Empires total war?[/QUOTE]
sure
[QUOTE=Scotchair]If you're under sieg it gives you plenty of time to send reinforcements from another province, so when they get there attack your attackers, then attack with the army from your castle to cath the enemy in the middle.
I rarely have a town rebelling against me... not really sure what I do, it's been a while since I played it.[/QUOTE]
I know you can forcibly break the siege, I just don't see the point in having a whole defensive battle aspect to castles if you never get to use it.
[QUOTE=chris0132]I know they used to siege castles and I also know that that is much more intelligent than attacking them, and I do it myself, but it's not [B]fun[/B] to be on the recieving end of a siege. I know castles provide most of your unit production and that the point of them is that they make you choose between a unit production facility in the area and keeping a good economy, but the whole siege mechanic is a lot of fun, you just never get to play it in the campaign as the defenders and there's no point doing it as the attackers.
It doesn't happen all that often but it's happened a few times. Just random sieges that I have to send my local response army to annihilate.
I find that to make a decent number of units you have to spend a few turns producing and rallying them, and that they cost a bomb to upkeep, and then you have to leave them in a town you capture for twenty turns because the place is a shithole and the people end up rebelling if you don't keep beating down on them with your army. I can't build any health or law buildings either, so I suppose I'll just have to sack more cities instead of occupying them, but that annoys me because the place ends up smashed and you have to then pay to rebuild it.[/QUOTE]
One tactic that I used a lot in Rome Total War was to give out a few of my cities as gifts to my enemies, then retake them and exterminate the population. I suggest you try it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
