Is the whole NTW\ETW Engine a failure?

[Greve Af Göteborg]

@Warhammster; it would seem that you're throwing that word at everyone that don't agree with you.

If you can't come up with a good enough counter point, say nothing at all or accept that you've been beaten in a debate.

[Warhammster]

@Warhammster; it would seem that you're throwing that word at everyone that don't agree with you.

If you can't come up with a good enough counter point, say nothing at all or accept that you've been beaten in a debate.

What debate?

[Greve Af Göteborg]

Every situation where two parts are arguing with each other is considered to be a debate.

Like this one.

[Lockhard]

Engine is great, it's CA that is a Fail.

[♔ brucedickenson♔]

Hooks in you, as Iron Maiden sang quite fits it.

[pajomife]

And another point, I can find much more differences between a Medieval mod and the original game ,than between Empire and Napoleon. But who cares? THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SPEND MORE THEN 80K IN EMPIRE AND DLC ARE THE SAME WHO PRE ORDER NAPY. Some people have easy money, Im sorry but I cant say the same.

[metenojo]

And another point, I can find much more differences between a Medieval mod and the original game ,than between Empire and Napoleon. But who cares? THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SPEND MORE THEN 80K IN EMPIRE AND DLC ARE THE SAME WHO PRE ORDER NAPY. Some people have easy money, Im sorry but I cant say the same.

About 150 dollars for a game some add ons and a official mod? Some people don't earn this in a month.

[Modestus]

Another interesting thing about the Game engine is how it uses the campaign map.

In HOI3 you can very easily add different terrain to the campaign map not only will the texture be added the effects will also,so turning a wooded province into a desert is relatively easy. Of course HOI3 does not have 3D battles but the important thing to remember when looking at the HOI3 campaign map is, all that you see is relevant to your movement and combat.

The campaign map for ETW on the other hand is a little strange, we know that the tactical battles that are generated are rather repetitive this suggests to me that a large parts of the campaign map have no relevance whatsoever for Warscape when it generates a tactical map.

It appears to use very little input from the campaign map, we can take a guess at some of the relevant input.

1\ The armies, size and composition.

2\ The deployment of the armies relative to their position on the campaign map. This was reversed until it was patched, I suspect and still do that it was the game engine mixing up the role of each army placing the defender in the attackers deployment zone.

3\ Reinforcements if any.

4\ A city without a fort, this means a little town will be included on the tactical map, it also means that if an army intercepts another army from a city a little town will also be included, in fact for an assault or an interception the same map is used.

5\ A city with a fort. This means a fort will be included on the tactical map and like the city it also means that a fort will be included for an interception and just like a city the same map will be used for two different and distinct tactical situations (a very poor game mechanic)

6\ A bridge means that a bridge battle will be generated, very few and they are nearly all the same.

7\ Culture, tells the engine what type of buildings to use.

8\ The type of vegetation , European , Middle-Eastern ( deserts ) South American (Jungle). A few more but this input appears to cover a wide area so if a map is generated in Europe it will have European type vegetation could be linked to culture.

Anyhow as you go through the list it becomes apparent that the campaign map is really only a guide, it has only a tentative and generalised connection with the type of tactical map that will be generated compared to what you see on the campaign map. Because of this it repeats a lot of the maps and with the influence of the zone of control you are fighting tactical battles on terrain that is very similar and not very imaginative.

In theory it would seem that you could have an infinite variation in the type of terrain you fight over but that depends on the variation in the input and the way it works at the moment it can cause some serious strategic errors for example bringing in reinforcements that on a real map would be too far away.

At present its a step backwards from previous games because it breaks the connection between the campaign map and the tactical maps.

[Shlozza]

Another interesting thing about the Game engine is how it uses the campaign map.

Interesting indeed. I must admit I've never paid that much attention to the relationship between the campaign map and the battle maps, apart from one of the first things I noticed being that the position of the armies were reversed. I guess is just one more thing that came in with the new engine that was never really perfected.

[Modestus]

Interesting indeed. I must admit I've never paid that much attention to the relationship between the campaign map and the battle maps, apart from one of the first things I noticed being that the position of the armies were reversed. I guess is just one more thing that came in with the new engine that was never really perfected.

On the surface I think ETW appears to be very much like any other total war game but when you take a close look its not.

It is a much smaller world then people think, ironically you could in theory have an infinite variation in the types of battlefields but in practise you have very little variation. Hopefully its a long term plan by CA to make use of an engine that can generate functional battle terrain of increasing complexity and variation with relative ease.

Of course it may also be a dead end because if the AI cannot manoeuvre around what is essentially a square fort it certainly wont be able to work with the type of cities that you could find in RTW or MTW2.

[ne'er-do-well]

I wouldnt bring this up if it was the first time id seen this on these forums.

It seems to me the whole Empire\napoleon engine is a failure.

Why? here are my logical reasons.

8. etc, etc.

If you have futher reasons that you'll edit in later fair enough and your welcome to say so in your post but using etc etc like this looks like an easy way to give your argument more weight without anyone being able to challange it.

[Shlozza]

by this, do you mean unreasonable demands, and unreasonable deadlines? and putting Steam onto the game in lieu of other anti-piracy options?

Mostly the former. Don't tell Humble, but I'm actually a pretty big fan of Steam. I think it's a good thing for the industry, the consumer and the environment. What I was mostly referring to was Sega's insistence upon releasing the game on schedule regardless of its state. In Sega's defense, some of the responsibility likely lies with CA for giving Sega a release date that they then failed to meet, and let's not forget that the game had been delayed once already. But the bottom line is that if CA were operating independently of Sega, they would have been in a position to delay the game for long enough to get it in a fit state for release. But, as a general rule, publishers like Sega care little for the reputation of their subsidiaries or the actual quality of the games they release. And I'm also talking about the "casualisation" of the series. The inevitable consequence of a publisher seeking to maximise profits is their attempts to make the game mass-marketable to the casual consumer, which generally comes at the expense of its original appeal. The best example that springs to mind is the Rainbow Six series. It was my favourite series of games, until Ubisoft got their greedy hands on it and turned it into just another terrorist-killing romp with storylines that would make a B-grade action movie director blush.

I don't know how justified that statement is but I like the term 'parasitic relationship' perphaps a tad unfair?

Perhaps a tad. But it goes back to what I was saying above. The publisher doesn't care a great deal about the quality of their games or the good name of their subsidiaries or franchises. There are several reasons for this, but here's the main one. What is the greatest asset of a niche-market, independent developer? Their IP, their reputation and the reputation of their games. What is the greatest asset of a multinational corporation? Money. Plain and simple. The faster you make money, the more franchises and subsidiaries you can aquire. So when given the choice between maintaining the good reputation of CA and the Total War series and making a quick buck, Sega chose the latter. The definition of a parasitic relationship is where one organism benefits at the expense of the other. And it seems to me that that's largely what's happening here.

[Humble Warrior]

I wouldnt bring this up if it was the first time id seen this on these forums.





If you have futher reasons that you'll edit in later fair enough and your welcome to say so in your post but using etc etc like this looks like an easy way to give your argument more weight without anyone being able to challange it.

Wow. that made no sense at all.

i`d go back and think first before actually writing and posting whatever it is you mean.

[ne'er-do-well]

Wow. that made no sense at all.

i`d go back and think first before actually writing and posting whatever it is you mean.

Haha, well then let me try again.

You writing "Etc etc" is just you implying you have more reasons for thinking the empire engine is a failure but not actually telling anyone what those reasons are. Its empty air dressed up as a point in an argument. If you have more reasons then add them to your post; if you don't then delete the "Etc etc" and stop implying that you do.

[Henry707]

Wow. that made no sense at all.

i`d go back and think first before actually writing and posting whatever it is you mean.

Touche, another point for the fencing word smith Another one caught in a daft flame war without end..

[Baghdad Brigden]

oops

[Tony83]

For those of you disappointed with ETW, and I would include myself there, can I suggest that you chalk it up to experience and move on with your lives. CA dropped the ball with this one, but even though they have expended a lot of effort trying to fix it, it's probably not going to get any better as the company are now obliged to move on to other projects.

What we can hope is that they have learned valuable lessons and applied them to NTW. Moreover, ranting and raging at Nappy Wars, a popular pastime at the moment it seems, is pointless and fruitless, because it is all conjecture based on third party reports. In less than a month we will have the real thing to try and pass comment on, so why not save your effort and bile for then.

And to those who will undoubtedly find NTW lacking in major areas, can I suggest that you learn from your mistakes, stop putting your fingers in the fire, don't buy any more CA games and go find and play a game you do like.

[Baghdad Brigden]

For those of you disappointed with ETW, and I would include myself there, can I suggest that you chalk it up to experience and move on with your lives. CA dropped the ball with this one, but even though they have expended a lot of effort trying to fix it, it's probably not going to get any better as the company are now obliged to move on to other projects.

What we can hope is that they have learned valuable lessons and applied them to NTW. Moreover, ranting and raging at Nappy Wars, a popular pastime at the moment it seems, is pointless and fruitless, because it is all conjecture based on third party reports. In less than a month we will have the real thing to try and pass comment on, so why not save your effort and bile for then.

And to those who will undoubtedly find NTW lacking in major areas, can I suggest that you learn from your mistakes, stop putting your fingers in the fire, don't buy any more CA games and go find and play a game you do like.

Do you really think that improvement comes by everyone just clamming up and giving CA a free pass as you see to be? If you don't like reading the opinions of others perhaps it's you who should find another hobby and stop coming to internet forums.

C.

[Huberto]

For those of you disappointed with ETW, and I would include myself there, can I suggest that you chalk it up to experience and move on with your lives. CA dropped the ball with this one, but even though they have expended a lot of effort trying to fix it, it's probably not going to get any better as the company are now obliged to move on to other projects.

CA was obliged to move onto other projects, how so? I would say rather that CA is "obliged" to fix and polish a game they sold to you and I until it was in the state advertised at release. And I would say that your pre-order of Napoleon provides precisely the escape hatch for CA to avoid their obligation to their customers alltogether. See I love the games too much, so I can't allow them to do that.

What we can hope is that they have learned valuable lessons and applied them to NTW. Moreover, ranting and raging at Nappy Wars, a popular pastime at the moment it seems, is pointless and fruitless.

As opposed to the gushing over uniforms and other fruitless exercises in fan-boy worship -- now that sort of unqualified praise sends a strong message to the company not to scrimp on quality this time around doesn't it?

And to those who will undoubtedly find NTW lacking in major areas, can I suggest that you learn from your mistakes, stop putting your fingers in the fire, don't buy any more CA games and go find and play a game you do like.

Shut up and go away? Kieran couldn't have said it any better.

[priam11]

But...but...this is the internets!