Empire Preview & Interview (PC Gamer via CVG article)

[Thamis]

Found here:
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...70570&skip=yes

[alpaca]

Now I just hope you can live up to the expectations you build
How does the new AI work from a coding point of view?

[PurpleScotch]

Good news, I hope the Ottomans are well made .

[Thamis]

We can't comment on specifics of the AI or the code yet. When we get closer to release, we'll probably start a developer diary where we explain how things work in detail.

[edders]

Damn, this really is the least appealing timeframe to me (and I expect that regardless of the reality of the situation, a great many consumers would think the same - this kind of era isn't exactly hot property atm when you consider how Rome and Medieval were greatly helped by the resurgence of films based around similar settings).

I'm sure CA can make a great game, but I think they'll be bringing in customers with their reputation and the magazine hype rather than a lot of people thinking 'wow, I'd really love to play this kind of game'. Considering that my computer will only able to run games on medium/low settings within a year or so I think I'll give it a miss and pick up Viking instead .

[Marku]

http://ve3d.ign.com/images/game/9583...pire-Total-War did you guys see this screenshot in-game

[Thamis]

It's true, this era isn't filled with the hollywood glamour that Rome and the Middle Ages got. But if you look at movies like Master & Commander and The Patriot, you'll see why it's damn cool to play. Also, the campaign game is a lot more interesting in this era.

Damn, this really is the least appealing timeframe to me (and I expect that regardless of the reality of the situation, a great many consumers would think the same - this kind of era isn't exactly hot property atm when you consider how Rome and Medieval were greatly helped by the resurgence of films based around similar settings).

I'm sure CA can make a great game, but I think they'll be bringing in customers with their reputation and the magazine hype rather than a lot of people thinking 'wow, I'd really love to play this kind of game'. Considering that my computer will only able to run games on medium/low settings within a year or so I think I'll give it a miss and pick up Viking instead .

[edders]

Still, it doesn't really excite me. But maybe after viewing a couple of trailers I'll be convinced, so I guess I'll keep an open mind.

[Rex Armeniae]

Your so right Thamis!
This time frame is so damn cool! Its my favourite time period. I LOVE SHIPS! And i guess thats a reason you picked this time era, because making Naval battles... you want the best. And this is it. Ships were beauties in those days.

One thing is just worrying me, to much gunpowder.

[Ketzerfreund]

The key battle of the era was Waterloo (but not the only battle: "Why does everyone always come back to bloody Waterloo?" Mike grumbles).

Thanks to ABBA...?

-Der Ketzerfreund.

[imb39]

More importantly, this is the period where Britain establishes it's superiority! woohoo!!

[el_dude]

Damn, this really is the least appealing timeframe to me (and I expect that regardless of the reality of the situation, a great many consumers would think the same - this kind of era isn't exactly hot property atm when you consider how Rome and Medieval were greatly helped by the resurgence of films based around similar settings).

I'm sure CA can make a great game, but I think they'll be bringing in customers with their reputation and the magazine hype rather than a lot of people thinking 'wow, I'd really love to play this kind of game'. Considering that my computer will only able to run games on medium/low settings within a year or so I think I'll give it a miss and pick up Viking instead .

well i really couldn't care less if it's a popular era with the general public since i love this period, but like you said, CA will probably be able to move a lot of units based on their rep and all the magazine hype that is generated, but hey! what's wrong with that? if it gets more people to play the game and begin appreciating the period, everyone wins

[La Vache Qui Rit]

Originally Posted by Thamis View Post
It's true, this era isn't filled with the hollywood glamour that Rome and the Middle Ages got. But if you look at movies like Master & Commander and The Patriot, you'll see why it's damn cool to play. Also, the campaign game is a lot more interesting in this era.

If it was just the Patriot I'd be off to play tiddly winks instead - a seriously uncool movie.

Question for CA.

How will factions that don't engage in the Industrial Revolution be modelled playable? Surely they will be at a serious disadvantage? After all it is the technological, cultural and social changes that were happening in the West which allowed it to dominate and create these empires. Can you play as India/Persia/Ottoman Empire? Do your troops stop at a certain level?

Does Britain get a head start on the Industrial Revolution?

[Thamis]

We're balancing all factions to be viable. Some might be stronger than others, due to their starting position though, of course. This is what we've always done in TW!

[PurpleScotch]

Yes, but some factions in M2TW weren't balanced, Egypt didn't have a proper army, for example.

But still, I think you'll do a great job with all factions this time!

[Garnier]

Are technologies going to be linked to buildings as usual, or will they come at the same time for all/most factions, allowing the AI factions to progress at nearly the same rate as the player?

I hate in M2TW, having armies of pikemen, cannons, and musketeers, and fighting armies of spear militia and peasant archers..

The AI should have similar era armies when fighting the player.

[sapi]

Very, very, nice

I must admit that this is one of my favourite periods of history, though, so I'm a tad biased

...I must also be one of the few people to dislike the even balancing of factions; while it's a nice idea, it removes the possibility for a player to 'set their difficulty' based on their faction choice

Are technologies going to be linked to buildings as usual, or will they come at the same time for all/most factions, allowing the AI factions to progress at nearly the same rate as the player?

I hate in M2TW, having armies of pikemen, cannons, and musketeers, and fighting armies of spear militia and peasant archers..

The AI should have similar era armies when fighting the player.

Please, god, no

Linking AI advancement to that of the player instantly removes any incentive to tech up

[Garnier]

But how realistic is it for the german army in the 1500s to be composed of spear militia and peasant archers, while fighting the french army composed of pikement and muskets?


Trouble with allowing one nation to do better than another, is that the player almost always becomes that nation. If I want to, in M2TW I can have the best tech, own the entire college of cardinals, be most superior in my alliance system, and thus get anything I want, all at the same time, and in every game.

[HorseArcher]

More importantly, this is the period where Britain establishes it's superiority! woohoo!!

Ohh the British Pride, never ceases to amaze me. ...And the amount of tea being consumed daily.

[sapi]

Well, the solution there lies in programming the AI correctly, not cheating for it