Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 147

Thread: Napoleon Vs. Empire

  1. #1
    Enemy0fSociety's Avatar Murakawa
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    27

    Default Napoleon Vs. Empire

    So What are the main differences between Empire: Total War and Napoleon: Total War?

    Napoleon Bonaparte from a historical stand point is later, slightly more technologically advanced, and certainly has a larger force and influence in his time period. Just after King Louis XVI was beheaded by his own people during the French Revolution "started" by Maximilien Robespierre, France's people were really looking for any person that could put up some "victory" for France. They were brainwashed into thinking Napoleon Bonaparte knew it all and was a god in and of himself. Ultimately, which I personally hope the game ends with, is his major defeat at the Battle of Waterloo.

    Empire: Total War sounds much more of an entertaining series from my point of view. Several different factions all with different qualities and areas, all going for the same goal: absolute power. Empire: Total War from what I have read and researched is a better game.

    But what's your opinion? What are some of the pros and cons of both games?

  2. #2
    Celareon's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Boston, Socialist Paradise of Massachusetts
    Posts
    256

    Icon12 Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Empire:

    +Massive, 3 Theater World (Although crippled by small # of provinces)
    +Many different nations to choose from (Sharing the same bland, cookie cutter format albeit)
    +Fire by Rank
    +Open Ended Campaign

    -AI (Campaign and Battle)
    -Bugs (Half finished on release and I'm being kind)
    -Same units for each army mostly
    -Same ships for each navy
    -Doesn't feel polished (Wonder why)

    Napoleon:

    +Better AI
    +More army differentiation
    +Attrition and Supply System
    +More, smaller regions
    +Better art design (completely subjective, but the 'portraits' in ETW were horrible)
    +Physically larger campaign map
    +Enhanced GFX engine

    -Smaller scope
    -Cost high for what is essentially a glorified expansion
    -little, if any integration or enhancement with/for its parent game, ETW
    -Only 4 nations to choose from in GC
    -was developed and released during a time when CA should have been focusing all its energy on repairing and upgrading Empire

    $.10

    Hannibal ad portas

  3. #3
    kinslayer's Avatar Aoba
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    48

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Honestly, along with what Celareon listed above, I've found that battles in NTW feel more like an arcade than an actual total war fight. I mean even at the extreme long range my guys are mowing down enemies, and vice versa. I find that....unrealistic. Thus battles are much much more quicker, and more fast paced. Also...if you break a line infantry regiment (say with 80 men left or so, or maybe a little more) they'll rout and stay routed...however, militia units, if you break them, even with 30 or so men left they'll turn around reform and run at you again. It's kind of insane, somewhat....lol. I scratched my head at that one..., yeah.
    "These are the names of 100 of the most prominent Senators and friends of Brutus in Roma. We should kill them, all of them, before they learn what we are about"
    Gaius Octavius Ceasar

  4. #4
    fast gamertag's Avatar Shashu
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    179

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Celareon View Post
    Empire:

    +Massive, 3 Theater World (Although crippled by small # of provinces)
    +Many different nations to choose from (Sharing the same bland, cookie cutter format albeit)
    +Fire by Rank
    +Open Ended Campaign

    -AI (Campaign and Battle)
    -Bugs (Half finished on release and I'm being kind)
    -Same units for each army mostly
    -Same ships for each navy
    -Doesn't feel polished (Wonder why)

    Napoleon:

    +Better AI
    +More army differentiation
    +Attrition and Supply System
    +More, smaller regions
    +Better art design (completely subjective, but the 'portraits' in ETW were horrible)
    +Physically larger campaign map
    +Enhanced GFX engine

    -Smaller scope
    -Cost high for what is essentially a glorified expansion
    -little, if any integration or enhancement with/for its parent game, ETW
    -Only 4 nations to choose from in GC
    -was developed and released during a time when CA should have been focusing all its energy on repairing and upgrading Empire

    $.10

    all this and i just want to say i think its just irritating that you can choose only 4 nations to play the CG with







  5. #5
    Tango12345's Avatar VTW Mod Leader
    Content Director Citizen Vault Staff

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    14,920

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    you can choose only 4 nations to play the CG with
    Reason number one why I am sticking with ETW atm...

  6. #6
    Inhuman One's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,461

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Napoleon just is not total war. Its about a single man and a few years of war.

    There are so few factions as well, its just not worthy of being called total war.

    If two cats are fighting in my backyard I might as well call that total war too.

  7. #7
    Hilarion's Avatar Banzai jūden-ki
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,745

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    A better question is Napoleon vs. DMUC...

  8. #8
    Enemy0fSociety's Avatar Murakawa
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    27

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    I would like to mention though how an entire Total War game can be focused on man, but honestly I think Napoleon Bonaparte was a poor choice. They should have chosen someone much more interesting like Genghis Khan or even the conquest of Julius Caesar, like RTW, but Caesar conquered so, so many different nations (factions) that would be extremely enjoyable to play with like the elephants of India crushing the Roman Square Shield Legionaries.

    ~EoS~

  9. #9
    Ikko-Ikki
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    I have to say it does feel totaly different from ETW, I set the game on hard/hard and took Paris after the first turn. The game feels very "empty". Let's hope Darth can weave his magic!

  10. #10
    Xerrop's Avatar Pili Prior
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,324

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Enemy0fSociety View Post
    I would like to mention though how an entire Total War game can be focused on man, but honestly I think Napoleon Bonaparte was a poor choice. They should have chosen someone much more interesting like Genghis Khan or even the conquest of Julius Caesar, like RTW, but Caesar conquered so, so many different nations (factions) that would be extremely enjoyable to play with like the elephants of India crushing the Roman Square Shield Legionaries.
    That´s a matter of personal taste. But Napoleon is definitly not a bad choice.
    Genghis Khan would include three chinese dynasties and the Khwarezm-Shahs (located in Central Asia and Persia) as major faction. Wouldn´t appeal to the casual TW-gamer.
    And Julius Caesar is the badest of your choice. The main aspect of a TW-game is a grand campaign. How can you include interesting factions in an era where Rome ruled the entire Mediterranean sea?
    Caesar´s campaigns were mainly against small tribes or kingdoms, when he wasn´t involved in Civil Wars against Pompey. The only other major faction would be the Parthians. People are complaining about only five playable factions in NTW. How would that be in a Ceasar Grand campaign?

  11. #11
    Mikiez's Avatar Kajiwara
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    292

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Did they give us the mod tools for either?
    Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names.
    -John F Kennedy
    If you +Rep me make sure you leave your name so I can Rep you back

  12. #12
    Enemy0fSociety's Avatar Murakawa
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    27

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote by Xerrop: And Julius Caesar is the badest of your choice. The main aspect of a TW-game is a grand campaign. How can you include interesting factions in an era where Rome ruled the entire Mediterranean sea?
    Caesar´s campaigns were mainly against small tribes or kingdoms, when he wasn´t involved in Civil Wars against Pompey. The only other major faction would be the Parthians. People are complaining about only five playable factions in NTW. How would that be in a Ceasar Grand campaign?
    See that's were I can't agree with you. We both agree on the common knowledge that Julius Caesar had an incredibly vast empire. What if now, you start the campaign with only some of this land, you need to conquer all of the lands he owned in history, and then you actually need to face all the rebellion he faced from all of the separate "small tribes or kingdoms." Then, when 44 A.D. roles around, Caesar is assassinated by his friends on March 15th. You must then pick up the pieces as your new faction leader, Caesar Octavian. And you completely forgot Julius Caesar's campaign against the Gauls?

    Every small faction would fight Caesar in a separate Grand Campaign and attempt to conquer other small areas including Corinth, Phillipi, India, Scythia, and don't forget the Mongolian Horde...

  13. #13
    Inhuman One's Avatar Tribunus
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,461

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    I think following specific people would work better for a kingdoms style expansion that consists out of multible smaller campaigns.

    For the medieval period it could focus on El-Cid, William the Conqueror, Frederick Barbarossa and Jean of Arc. To give some examples.

    This would allow for the most obvious and popular choices to shine as well as lesser known yet no less brilliant millitairy leaders to shine.

    Otherwise I would still need to wait for a lot of total war games.

    Hannibal: total war
    El-Cid: total war
    Maurice van Oranje-Nassau: total war
    Frederick Barbarossa: total war
    Julius Ceasar: total war
    Phyrrus: total war
    Frederick II: total war
    Ghenhis Kahn: total war
    Atilla: total war
    William Wallace: total war
    Michiel de Ruyter: total war

    Just to give a few examples.

  14. #14
    Nizam's Avatar Hastatas Prior
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Turkiye - Ankara
    Posts
    634

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Suleiman the Magnificent: Total War

  15. #15
    sysy16's Avatar Murakawa
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    24

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Enemy0fSociety View Post
    See that's were I can't agree with you. We both agree on the common knowledge that Julius Caesar had an incredibly vast empire. What if now, you start the campaign with only some of this land, you need to conquer all of the lands he owned in history, and then you actually need to face all the rebellion he faced from all of the separate "small tribes or kingdoms." Then, when 44 A.D. roles around, Caesar is assassinated by his friends on March 15th. You must then pick up the pieces as your new faction leader, Caesar Octavian. And you completely forgot Julius Caesar's campaign against the Gauls?

    Every small faction would fight Caesar in a separate Grand Campaign and attempt to conquer other small areas including Corinth, Phillipi, India, Scythia, and don't forget the Mongolian Horde...
    We have had Rome total war, it would never have worked. Caesar never "had" and incredibly vast empire! Napoleon took, Moscow, Madrid, Rome, Vienna, Berlin etc, Europe was much more populous and harder to conquer in many ways compared to the areas Caesar took. Napoleons Empire was an Empire, Caesar was not an Emperor and he never controlled and Empire.

    What you are decribing is a mish mash of another Rome Total war.

    Don't get me wrong, Napoleon total war will probably be pants given the mess they made with Empire (which is not too bad now) but Caesar total war makes no sense for the developers or even paying customers. Perhaps later on.

  16. #16
    MortenJessen's Avatar Pili
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,930

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Hi there.
    Comparing two different game-types against each other just is not fair to neither. Empire was, probably, meant to be the new Flagship of CA and Napoleon was meant to be an expansion pack. Just like the Rome and Alexander TW games. That it ended in disaster for CA (and Sega) was not just due to poor planning. I do not know weither people has looked around the global situation lately, but crisis is still out there. They NEEDED Empire out early to save them selves. After the poor performance be said game, CA instead of continuing as planned, made Napoleon their choice of Admirals 1'st Rate.
    And honestly, could a game be made that made all players around the globe happy? I enjoyed, and still enjoy, Empire, but Napoleon will, as all newer games, have my attention for quite a while now (well, after I finish my present Prussia Campaign).
    I will wait for your next too, CA. Do not let Empire of just yet though.
    Y.S.
    M. Jessen

  17. #17
    Celareon's Avatar Cornicularius
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Boston, Socialist Paradise of Massachusetts
    Posts
    256

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikiez View Post
    Did they give us the mod tools for either?
    No.

    That's the main reason I've been pissed off at CA since empire came out, where ARE the F'ing mod tools?

    I mean come on people, this is the bread and butter of the series, without mods...well...the TW series would not have the same stature in my mind, and if this closed-code, 'all modders for themselves' approach is what CA/sega have in mind for the future of the series then all they're doing is slowly choking themselves to death.

    Hannibal ad portas

  18. #18
    empr guy's Avatar Equites Alares
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,245

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Enemy0fSociety View Post
    See that's were I can't agree with you. We both agree on the common knowledge that Julius Caesar had an incredibly vast empire. What if now, you start the campaign with only some of this land, you need to conquer all of the lands he owned in history, and then you actually need to face all the rebellion he faced from all of the separate "small tribes or kingdoms." Then, when 44 A.D. roles around, Caesar is assassinated by his friends on March 15th. You must then pick up the pieces as your new faction leader, Caesar Octavian. And you completely forgot Julius Caesar's campaign against the Gauls?

    Every small faction would fight Caesar in a separate Grand Campaign and attempt to conquer other small areas including Corinth, Phillipi, India, Scythia, and don't forget the Mongolian Horde...

    *cough* RTW with a story line *cough*

    and julius ceaser didnt have a large empire, he conquered gaul, put down a rebelion, and was murdered.

    and when did ceaser fight in india or against the mongles?!?!?! are you aware the romans were seperated from india by parthia?
    odi et amo quare id faciam fortasse requiris / nescio sed fieri sentio et excrucior


  19. #19
    uanime5's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,813

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    Quote Originally Posted by Xerrop View Post
    That´s a matter of personal taste. But Napoleon is definitly not a bad choice.
    Genghis Khan would include three chinese dynasties and the Khwarezm-Shahs (located in Central Asia and Persia) as major faction. Wouldn´t appeal to the casual TW-gamer.
    And Julius Caesar is the badest of your choice. The main aspect of a TW-game is a grand campaign. How can you include interesting factions in an era where Rome ruled the entire Mediterranean sea?
    Caesar´s campaigns were mainly against small tribes or kingdoms, when he wasn´t involved in Civil Wars against Pompey. The only other major faction would be the Parthians. People are complaining about only five playable factions in NTW. How would that be in a Ceasar Grand campaign?
    Which 3 Chinese dynasties did Genghis Khan fight (I can only think of the Jin and Song).

    I'm surprised you didn't mention Alexander the Great, who conquered far more than Julius Caesar (Persia through to India).
    Expanded Japan mod (83 new regions,86 new factions)
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ew-factions%29

    How to split a region in TWS2
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...split-a-region

    ETW mapping information
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=355187

    Eras Total Conquest 2.3 (12 campaigns from 970-1547)

  20. #20
    aggie_john's Avatar Aquilifer
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    378

    Default Re: Napoleon Vs. Empire

    I don't know if its just because this is vanilla but I think the troops are not as good looking, now I am playing a heavily modded ETW right now, but NTW feels like little toy solider versus real war, it like the opposite of M2TW and all its grit factor? What is up with CA and its sudden G rated warfare? Again its not like they haven't given us Braveheart fighting before.

    Now I do love the new CAI, I am playing as Prussia and my little German Nation allies and me are forming a shield war against Napoleon's hordes and unlike ETW my allies are really helping, moving armies into key areas to defend each other and me, had to admit it put a smile on my face to see them jump a small French army for me.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •