Empire: Total War

[Timarvay]

So, any Empire players around here?

I just upgraded to Windows 7 and it keeps crashing at random, but after I get it running reliably I'll be up for multiplayer.

Also, is there a way to change the zoom to something other than mousewheel?

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I play once in a while. I was sorta disappointed in it, but I've been waiting for some good mods to come out. However, mine appears to be crashing, and redownloads aren't helping. It's doing the same on my friends computer. Sucks.

[toasty]

I bought it... but I don't really have time for the game seeing as it takes forever to go through a turn. Honestly, I think I liked Medieval Total War II more.

I've been playing through mount and blade, and I'll probably grab Torchlight some time soon.

[Flickerdart]

I've beaten Grand Campaigns a few times. Prussia is definitely the most fun one to play: so long as you can pull through the initial Poland/Austria dogpile, you pretty much win. United Provinces is great fun. Spain and Ottoman Empire are horrible, because they're sprawling empires with horrible leaders and degenerate everything.

[Zevox]

I played it, but it gets pretty monotonous. Mostly, I think, as a side-effect of simply how battles were fought in that era. Line up the infantry, fire the artillery, keep some cavalry around in case you get a good chance to hit something fast and hard... by the end of the game battles had all devolved into using mortars armed with percussion shells to wipe the enemy out while having my troops sit back to defend those mortars if the enemy ever got close. Plus pretty much all the different factions have the same units; again, product of the times, with standardization being the name of the game for militaries.

I played through the American Revolution campaign, but never did the full-length US campaign it offered afterward. Played one full-length campaign as the Maratha Confederacy, and got bored when, by the 1760s or 70s, I had conquered all of India and most of the Americas and Europe. Only a couple of native nations remained in the Americas (plus a few British regions, since I had allied with Britain, though they had lost a number of regions to natives which I had since scooped up for myself, so they didn't have as much as you may think), and in Europe only Poland and Russia remained as forces I wasn't allied with (plus the Barbary States, but they were allied with one of my allies, the Ottoman Empire), and even combined they were no match for me. The result was obvious and predetermined, so I no longer had an interest in playing it out.

I don't really have an interest in playing in multiplayer either. Maybe if they had that in Rome or Medieval 2, but not in Empire. Much as I like the much-expanded world map, the battles just aren't worth it.

Zevox

[Flickerdart]

I usually just auto-resolve battles. Fighting takes too long.

[Zevox]

In the late stages of that Maratha Grand Campaign I mentioned, I was doing that too, for the same reason. Which was in part why I lost interest. The game just isn't as much fun without fun battles that are worth playing through. Auto-resolve is boring, so when it's preferable to playing out a fight, that's a bad sign, from my perspective.

Zevox

[Flickerdart]

Maratha is one of the easiest nations to play. United Provinces is considerably more challenging. Ottoman Empire is fairly difficult too: all your regions are worth diddly squat.

[Martok]

I purchased ETW, but it's just never enthralled me that much.


Part of the reason is because of the time period: I've never been a big fan of warfare where gunpowder weapons figure prominently, which means that most eras after the late Medieval and/or early Renaissance period just don't interest me much.

The other main reason is the craptastic AI, especially on the campaign level: I've had too many factions declare war on me for stupid reasons, and/or where they've had no chance of beating me. I've had too many factions refuse peace offers from me, even when I've got them down to one city/province left (and usually, they're the ones who started the damn war in the first place!).

Granted, diplomacy and the strategic AI has long been a problem throughout the entire series. However, it was the only thing that was really going to hold my interest in Empire (given that the gunpowder-heavy battles hold little appeal for me), especially since diplomacy played such a huge role during this particular era in history. Also, it's extremely disappointing after all the boasting CA did about how they'd finally fixed these issues (AI and diplomacy), and about how great the AI in Empire was going to be.

[Timarvay]

The AI really was terrible at launch, but it is quite a bit better now. Not stunning, by any means, but passable.

[Dragor]

I played through an entire campaign as Prussia and had no desire to play again. I wasn't foaming at the mouth like the rest of the community, but was simply... neutral. Naval battles were good but I wasn't good at them, land battles had their moments and I really liked conquering America. But I felt there wasn't a lot of replay value, or nothing which made me want to play again; I felt like I'd seen it all.

It did, however, set me on the track to playing the R:TW mod Europa Barbarorum again, which, in my opinion, is the Total War series at its best.

I tried to reinstall Shogun, but for some reason it wouldn't work. I really liked Shogun. :smallfrown:

[Martok]

It did, however, set me on the track to playing the R:TW mod Europa Barbarorum again, which, in my opinion, is the Total War series at its best.
If you're saying that Rome is the best TW title, then I would have to vehemently disagree with you while laughing myself silly. If, however, you're specifically referring to EB, then I could forgive you for that statement. :smalltongue:



I tried to reinstall Shogun, but for some reason it wouldn't work. I really liked Shogun. :smallfrown:
Shogun -- and for that matter, MTW as well -- are notorious for not being able to run on newer hardware, particularly if you have an 8xxx or 9xxx series Nvidia video card. That CA has continued to sell both games without updating them so that they'll function on newer PC's is probably the single biggest reason (one of many) why I despise them as much as I do. :smallfurious:

[Myrmex]

The naval battles had a painfully steep learning curve, and the land ones were stale and static.

Though I did enjoy having an experience unit of British line mow down hoards of locals before fixing bayonet and charging.

[Dragor]

If you're saying that Rome is the best TW title, then I would have to vehemently disagree with you while laughing myself silly. If, however, you're specifically referring to EB, then I could forgive you for that statement. :smalltongue:

R:TW was great at the time but it's aged horribly. EB, however, is a brilliant use of the engine and really breathes life and realism into the game.


Shogun -- and for that matter, MTW as well -- are notorious for not being able to run on newer hardware, particularly if you have an 8xxx or 9xxx series Nvidia video card. That CA has continued to sell both games without updating them so that they'll function on newer PC's is probably the single biggest reason (one of many) why I despise them as much as I do. :smallfurious:

Ah, I wasn't aware of this. That's VERY annoying. -_- Shogun was probably my favourite setting. Ah well. I still have the first Medieval to go back to if I want old Total War.

[Ilena]

I loved all the total war games, empires is kinda ... meh to me, i dont know i enjoy the naval battles though those could be better, but i suppose it is the gunpowder because cavalry just ... die, i barely ever recruit a unit of them as they are not needed. I do enjoy watching my soldiers mow down the enemy but i enjoy far more having my men in buildings and defending it as such, i wonder what the next total war game will be.

[Arang]

I've played ... a few hours.

Overall, Empire has reversed what M2 did wrong and right: the overall management and strategy are far more intuitive, free-flowing and fun, but the battles are largely less fun and almost always progress the same way.

The biggest problem is that there's only one type of unit which is really worth keeping around, namely Line Infantry. In M2, you had light and heavy infantry, spear-men, archers, artillery and light, heavy and ranged cavalry, all of whom could play different parts in whittling down the enemy force, splitting or diverting them, packing them together for arrow fire and cannons or spreading them apart for a charge. This made for thousands of different strategies using a relatively basic set of principles.

In Empire, the pinnacle of tactical excellence is to maintain a line where every unit is not open to flanking, is not heavily out-gunned and always has something to shoot at, and that's ... pretty much it. Mass routs are either removed completely or incredibly difficult to effect, which means that numbers play a much bigger part in how battles go down.

Strategically, though, Empire is much better at giving you interesting battles to fight (if I never play a siege again it will be too soon), has cut down on the tedious Governor Shuffle and simplified construction and taxing, while expanding on trade. The diplomacy is lacklustre in both but arguably has an advantage in M2 (if you're okay with telling the Pope to die in a fire, that is).

Overall, Empire's a great game but I just like M2 more.

[Zevox]

The biggest problem is that there's only one type of unit which is really worth keeping around, namely Line Infantry.
I'm going to have to disagree. In my experience, there are three types of units worth keeping around: Line Infantry, Mortars (and their improved version), and heavy cavalry. Mortars are great for taking out sizeable chunks of enemy forces from an extreme range, especially once you have percussion shells (though before then explosive and quicklime shells work well too). And Heavy Cavalry are worth keeping a few units around to counter enemy cavalry who try to circle around and hit you from behind. Line Infantry are the most important, sure, but not quite the only one worth using.

Grenadiers are okay too. If they get a solid toss of their hand bombs off, they can decimate an enemy infantry unit with them. Only worth using a couple in any given army, though.

Zevox

[Timarvay]

I have to disagree on the multiplayer front, too.

Provided your opponent doesn't camp, multiplayer battles have a tendancy to be a lot more lively than when you fight the AI.

Light infantry is pretty much a necessity, along with some form of cavalry. I prefer light cavalry, but I seem to be in the minority on that front. Artillery is always good, although I don't see mortars in use very often. And the trick with grenadiers is to keep them just behind your lines, close to close range, and have them run up, throw, and run back while your opponent's unit is reloading. If you do it right you won't get casualties.

[Thorcrest]

I have to say I quite like the cavalry in Empire, yes it plays a minor role, but I like to only play against larger enemy forces, smaller or equal size is too easy:smalltongue:, but when the enemy have larger forces, the ability to break their flanks, or encircle them is priceless, even if it just breaks their formation for 10 seconds, dragoons can be sent in and then you can expose their weakness, this leads to MASSIVE ROUTS. Have you ever beaten a force of 3000 with 600 or less??? Also its only worth playing on Very Hard.