from Empire to Napoleon blog for CA
I am making this letter to CA to make some suggestions for napoleon and to point out some stuff they should have used from past TW games. heres the first part. go ahead and give me some feedback if you want. I will be updating it when I come up with new things to say. I hope you will enjoy it.
Dear members of The Creative Assembly,
I have been a fan of Total War games since Rome first came out. For its time it was a revolutionary game. With all its great features and possibilities it truly deserves to be called one of the best and most successful historic strategy games and an old time classic. I’m sure people will continue to praise that game for many years to come. I am, however, not writing this to tell you how wonderful I thought Rome: total war is. I’m sure you already know this. No, I am writing this because of recent complications with Empire Total war. Now I know you probable think by now that I am going to tell you about all things I thought were wrong with Empire. And your right, I am. But more importantly I am going to talk about the good things about Empire and its predecessors, and about the things I hope I can persuade you to do different in Napoleon.
Chapter I: The beauty of a new world.
There were many things I liked about Empire Total war. Mainly in the campaign mode the addition of sea battles, towns in regions and the many different factions you put in. but also smaller things, like how every faction spoke a different language, or that certain cities have unique buildings. Such details are usually well accepted by fans and add a nice touch to a game. Other things in the battles were hiding behind walls, garrisoning buildings, being able to see the range of your soldiers weapons, etc. Etc. You already know these things because it were all the new and exciting stuff you put in for that reason. To make people excited about the game and to give it that new feeling. But sometimes new isn’t always better.
Chapter II: The shadow of a past Empire.
Sometimes it’s best to look at what was done well last time instead of putting in more new stuff. For example: city battles. Did you ever receive much criticism about how you had done the city battles in Rome (besides: it always looks the same.)? I bet not as much as your getting now. People love to defend cities. At least I did. It was one of my favourite things in Rome (and also Medieval II). Mainly because in Rome, being in a city actually had advantages. You needed siege weapons to even attack (which could usually buy you a turn or two if you were defending), archers on the wall were allot harder to kill then on the ground, often you would lose allot of men just by walking towards the wall, gates and towers were an easy way to defend yourself and kill allot of enemies and enemies could even be forced to retreat by destroying their siege towers or lighting their siege rams in flames. Now, in Empire, you don’t need any rams or ladders or even artillery. You can just rappel an entire army on a wall in a matter of minutes. Now I realise you probably did this for the sake of time so sieges wouldn’t last for hours but it’s not exactly what I would call realistic and it probably did more harm than good. That is why my first request to you, CA, is to please PLEASE, if you’re not going to put in city battles at least, for the sake of not only gameplay but also realism, get rid of the ‘rappel up a star fort’ and put back the good old ladders that maybe take a turn to build. This way, forts become not only easier to defend and harder to attack, it also makes artillery more important and possible gives you or the computer a chance to bring in reinforcements. Also, very importantly, make a fort not only a bit harder to kill but also allow its guns to be manned without a battalion of troops having to stand behind it and make them a bit more powerful or put up some more guns. I’m sure, at the time, a fort had enough people to man the guns it had, even without a garrisoning army. Now these are simple changes, that you should easily be able to make, that would make playing a siege battle much more enjoyable, realistic, and challenging for attackers. And don’t worry if it make sieges last a bit longer, that gives players more reasons not to attack a fort. Which wasn’t done very often anyway. There are many other things to make forts more challenging and fun to play but right now the things I said above are easiest to implement and make a ton of difference. End of part one.
Reply With Quote
) there would be no way that a campaign would have gotten that far.
Originally Posted by OTZ
:usflag:
