The (Old) Official ETW Criticism Thread

[Swiss Halberdier]

The reinforcement system is a really step backwards comparing to Medieval 2...

[Strategos Brutus]

-A lot of CTDs
-Clonarmies
-Dumbass-AI
-Reinforcement-system. Getting me haemoriods
-No Blood, why CA? That would be awesome, looking at marching soldiers with blood on their uniforms. Think bout Medieval II
-Factions got nearly the same Roster
-Perfomance on Campaign Map
-Overall Perfomance *sigh


Anyway good Game

[jahjeremy]

I wanted the land battle AI to be...

if (vastly outnumbered)
retreat
if (slightly outnumbered)
skirmish, hole up in buildings
else if (even numbers)
stay in corner, make a nice defensive firing line, flank attacks
else if (more numbers)
advance with coherent firing line, make flank attacks

But we seemed to have gotten...

if (vastly outnumbered)
sit there and get pummeled
else if (slightly outnumbered)
throw away cavalry in massive charge, dribble in infantry in useless incoherent blobs
else if (even numbers)
see slightly outnumbered
else if (more numbers)
see even numbers

And the AI in general....it has no idea how to skirmish or make a coherent firing line or flank attack. In other words, it doesn't seem to be able to do much of anything right.

What do you all think of this assessment, too harsh? I guess that after all the hype I was expecting to fight Napoleon but apparently they cloned some Mongol general code from MTW2. :hmmm:

[Akimov]

Not harsh enough!, funny this inability to do anything right didn't show up in "real gameplay" trailers. Call me a cynic

CA have again released a game where the central element (the battles) dont work!!!!

I should have expected it. The AI on Rome and M2 were pretty awful until modded.

Where do they get off getting paid to do this shoddy .

Didn't appear in Kieran's AAR with Prussia

"Win war with Austria after they all clumped together in one stupid mass in every single battle"

[TheLastPrivate]

Step ahead in time period, step back in quality... how?

[Pink Beard]

I wanted the land battle AI to be...

if (vastly outnumbered)
retreat
if (slightly outnumbered)
skirmish, hole up in buildings
else if (even numbers)
stay in corner, make a nice defensive firing line, flank attacks
else if (more numbers)
advance with coherent firing line, make flank attacks

But we seemed to have gotten...

if (vastly outnumbered)
sit there and get pummeled
else if (slightly outnumbered)
throw away cavalry in massive charge, dribble in infantry in useless incoherent blobs
else if (even numbers)
see slightly outnumbered
else if (more numbers)
see even numbers

And the AI in general....it has no idea how to skirmish or make a coherent firing line or flank attack. In other words, it doesn't seem to be able to do much of anything right.

What do you all think of this assessment, too harsh? I guess that after all the hype I was expecting to fight Napoleon but apparently they cloned some Mongol general code from MTW2. :hmmm:

HAHAHAHA LOOOl

+rep VERY funny post haha!!

[centurie]

hate the game .takes over my life ..wife does not talk to me...no time for the kids.....how can a game be this cruel??

[Thornwallis]

Pathfinding is horrrrrrrible.
AI is horrrrrrible.

I don't usually rant like this... but it's justified this time. I'm thinking about returning the game if they'll take it.

Maybe the modders can do something with this...

Worst part is how they advertised their full time staff devoted to AI. Did they even play the game?

[javanmard]

I am dissapointed that:

- I am having to play the Ottomans to be able to unlock the Safavids and the Mughals. That really really really sucks big time!
- that in the middle east the buildings look European

[Kewpur]

You can't unlock the mughals or safavids. You can't unlock any factions.

They look fine to me.

[Jmeyer1292]

The unit diversity, while perhaps historically accurate, is atrocious and not conducive to giving the game's factions a unique feel. What really really annoys me is how CA choose to sell unique units separately when the game itself has so few. They really did cut out pieces of the game to sell for extra.

[eddy_purpus]

I wanted the land battle AI to be...

if (vastly outnumbered)
retreat
if (slightly outnumbered)
skirmish, hole up in buildings
else if (even numbers)
stay in corner, make a nice defensive firing line, flank attacks
else if (more numbers)
advance with coherent firing line, make flank attacks

But we seemed to have gotten...

if (vastly outnumbered)
sit there and get pummeled
else if (slightly outnumbered)
throw away cavalry in massive charge, dribble in infantry in useless incoherent blobs
else if (even numbers)
see slightly outnumbered
else if (more numbers)
see even numbers

And the AI in general....it has no idea how to skirmish or make a coherent firing line or flank attack. In other words, it doesn't seem to be able to do much of anything right.

What do you all think of this assessment, too harsh? I guess that after all the hype I was expecting to fight Napoleon but apparently they cloned some Mongol general code from MTW2. :hmmm:

:o
And to my mind...
I remember the CA devs talking about how Much the Ai was tuned up and was better and it would" kick your arse" and stuff...
im pretty happy right now i cant play the game

Not harsh enough!, funny this inability to do anything right didn't show up in "real gameplay" trailers. Call me a cynic

CA have again released a game where the central element (the battles) dont work!!!!

I should have expected it. The AI on Rome and M2 were pretty awful until modded.

Where do they get off getting paid to do this shoddy .

Didn't appear in Kieran's AAR with Prussia

"Win war with Austria after they all clumped together in one stupid mass in every single battle"

Step ahead in time period, step back in quality... how?

maybe ..... Publicity ?
Maybe he was tricking you guys and telling lies?

[django333]

You can't unlock the mughals or safavids. You can't unlock any factions.

Is this true? I thought when you destroy a faction it is unlocked like in previous games. This will really kill the replay value.

[Korvus77]

I want to play as Venice or Savoia.

I want to have Vicenza as a province/more provinces.

I want 4 turns a year and penalties that make me want to have my troops in shelter during the winter.

And I want it all yesterday.

Billy Connolly will do the rest of my ranting for me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXit0FTxa1U

[jahjeremy]

"The unit diversity, while perhaps historically accurate"

Actually, the generic unit mix in this game is not historically accurate at all.

Armies and even units within armies of that time period had very colorful uniforms and a big variety in terms of abilities, equipment, and appearance. Hats, unit insignia, colorful coats, braids, etc. were all standard issue and varied from regiment to regiment.

There were big differences between armies in terms of focus on cavalry, infantry, and artillery, unit morale, firearm accuracy and range, walking speed, infantry preference for ranged versus melee, etc.

Napoleon included Polish cavalry and also Mamluks in his army. His light infantry skirmishers were superb; the line infantry was adequate but not outstanding with sometimes shaky morale if they weren't winning. They got a big boost in morale when he was around the battle field. The French artillery was the best on the planet. The light cavalry was great but the heavy cavalry was probably just good to average, this wing becoming somewhat less important as infantry tactics and equipment improved. The French naval wing was pretty bad and totally outclassed by the Brits. The elite French infantry were also among the best on the planet. The mobility of the French armies was beyond that of their opponents.

That's just the French. Every faction should have been given a detailed treatment like this, and if there were balance issues, you can easily fix these types of problems later in patching.

For instance, Russian infantry could have been a disorganized rabble, artillery questionable, with great mounted units like Cossacks for hit-and-run tactics.

British could have been given dominant navy. Their infantry was not the best and it took extended campaigns with lots of allies to finally bring Napoleon down. Also, their vaunted line infantry got slapped down by a bunch of rabble (U-S-A, U-S-A, haha). Ah, there was the French blockade, but still, if the British had better infantry they might have won. And the British cavalry during this period? Not good AFAIK. They didn't even have very good cavalry during the medieval period (in general...lack of horses!).

The generic feel is not accurate at all, and I don't care for it. MTW2 had more flavor to each faction. The English to me was the bows and mortars faction. And also Knights Templar if you can get them. With bones of Armored Swordsmen and English Knights.

It would be cool in Empire if each faction was more unique but you could still (in certain circumstances, with enough money) hire another country's soldiers as mercenaries, because there was still a lot of paid/professional mercenaries at the company level. Napoleon had men from all over Europe in his army, including from Germany, Poland, Austria, and Italy.

Also, wouldn't it be cool if they had included a uniform designer in game not just as a mod tool?

Ah, well, back to ma line infantry...

[Serenissima]

Is this true? I thought when you destroy a faction it is unlocked like in previous games. This will really kill the replay value.

Nope. We can't play any other factions, because it would confuse casual players.

My Rant... is that the game has been horribly dumbed down in so many ways that we might as well be playing it on a console. No modding seems easily possible, no console, every army in the world wears the exact same uniform and sails the same four ships... the pathfinding and unit positioning just don't work, there's only about six battle-maps in the entire game... urrrrgh.

[SuperKyle]

It makes me sad I bought it on steam, I can't return it.

Oh well. Operation Flashpoint dragon rising is only 3 months away.

[guinnessman]

The naval battles are pretty grim. I've played half-a-dozen so far against Pirates and the Spanish, with odds of anywhere from me being stupidly outgunned to me stupidly outgunning them, and the best result I've had has been a Close Defeat.

Case in point - I take a fifth-rate flagship with a 4-star admiral on board, two fourth-rate ships, a brig, and two sloops against a Spanish force consisting of a galleon with a 3-star admiral on board and a brig.

End result - I lose my flagship, the brig, both sloops, and the two fourth-raters escape with heavy damage. The Spanish lose a brig. The galleon still had about 80% of its guns left and just over two thirds of its crew.

My tactics were to get in close and use cannister rounds to kill off as much of the enemy crew as possible. Hey, it worked for the Royal Navy, so why not? In the first few minutes of the above battle I get one of my fourth-raters in directly behind the galleon, very close range, and give it a full broadside of cannister from 50+ cannon. It kills two crewmen on the galleon. Not good.

The computer-controlled Spanish stuck to salvoes of shot, which quickly sent my ships to the bottom.

That's not even remotely historically accurate. Very few ships were actually sunk by gunfire during naval combat in the 1700's, the vast majority of the time they were shot up and then captured by boarding actions.

I also found it very difficult to control any more than 3 ships in a naval engagement, even with autofire left on.

Really disappointing.

[jahjeremy]

"Very few ships were actually sunk by gunfire during naval combat in the 1700's, the vast majority of the time they were shot up and then captured by boarding actions."

That's awesome. Have you read/seen any cool information on this lately you could point me to?

+rep

[guinnessman]

"The unit diversity, while perhaps historically accurate"

Actually, the generic unit mix in this game is not historically accurate at all.

British could have been given dominant navy. Their infantry was not the best and it took extended campaigns with lots of allies to finally bring Napoleon down. Also, their vaunted line infantry got slapped down by a bunch of rabble (U-S-A, U-S-A, haha). Ah, there was the French blockade, but still, if the British had better infantry they might have won. And the British cavalry during this period? Not good AFAIK. They didn't even have very good cavalry during the medieval period (in general...lack of horses!).

The generic feel is not accurate at all, and I don't care for it. MTW2 had more flavor to each faction. The English to me was the bows and mortars faction. And also Knights Templar if you can get them. With bones of Armored Swordsmen and English Knights.

Agree with the core of what you're saying, however the British line infantry was among the best on the planet by the time of the Napoleonic wars. The trouble was that there just wasn't enough of it. The British experience in the US War of Independence forced them to take a look at their infantry tactics and address a lot of issues, and even then they still managed to win quite a few of the battles against the fledgling US (Fusiliers by Mark Urban is a great book about this process BTW).

Still, it's true enough - whilst the unit types (line infantry, guards, lancers etc) might have been generic to most armies, reflecting the strengths and weaknesses that each army had in each of these types should really have been reflected in the game.