I want Empire 2 Total War

[onmy6]

I hope you're kidding...

Of course I am NOT kidding, I have all the total war games bar warhammer and shogan2, and I'd have to say that ETW is the best of them all by far!
now with that said all total war games are pretty crappy out of the box ie: vanilla, but ETW as a core to build on is brilliant and for me the concept of having 3 completely different theatres of war and the time period is absolutely fantastic
If you get tired of boring old Europe you can concentrate on the America's or if you are bored with the America's and Europe you can concentrate on the India's etc etc, the vastness of mods available is superb But quite frankly who on Gods green earth would play any Total War game without mods out of the box, they get pretty boring fast and I think CA knows this which is why they allow it to be modded because you need the base game if you want to play any of the amazing mods available, also if you look at the code within ETW there is alot that they left out it, looks as though it was going to be even bigger and better than the end result but I guess Sega wanted it out faster than CA expected which is a shame (however I digress)
I use Darthmod, Minor Faction Revenge, Polish Units 2, ROARv2, French Indian Wars, Huron Warparty, NAP effects and couple of others of my own all of which I've altered to work with one another and I just love it
So to reiterate Yes ETW is the best Total War game by along streak in my opinion and experience

[Patronus86]

Of course I am NOT kidding, I have all the total war games bar warhammer and shogan2, and I'd have to say that ETW is the best of them all by far!
now with that said all total war games are pretty crappy out of the box ie: vanilla, but ETW as a core to build on is brilliant and for me the concept of having 3 completely different theatres of war and the time period is absolutely fantastic
If you get tired of boring old Europe you can concentrate on the America's or if you are bored with the America's and Europe you can concentrate on the India's etc etc, the vastness of mods available is superb But quite frankly who on Gods green earth would play any Total War game without mods out of the box, they get pretty boring fast and I think CA knows this which is why they allow it to be modded because you need the base game if you want to play any of the amazing mods available, also if you look at the code within ETW there is alot that they left out it, looks as though it was going to be even bigger and better than the end result but I guess Sega wanted it out faster than CA expected which is a shame (however I digress)
I use Darthmod, Minor Faction Revenge, Polish Units 2, ROARv2, French Indian Wars, Huron Warparty, NAP effects and couple of others of my own all of which I've altered to work with one another and I just love it
So to reiterate Yes ETW is the best Total War game by along streak in my opinion and experience

Well, to each their own. My take is that ETW can be half decent with mods (i'm a big fan of Darth Mod as well). And the musket battles look good, that's for sure. But there is a bit more strategy and nuance to maneuvering line units and cavalry in a musket-era setting vs melee-focused combat. The AI in Rome and Medieval 2, wasn't amazing, but it was good enough to make the battles somewhat challenging (especially with the right mods). The AI in ETW just doesn't have the capacity to really challenge a human player in musket combat, unless the AI army has more troops and/or better quality troops, but even that isn't always a challenge.

Yes, I love the geographic depth of this game, and the variety of factions and units and the trade mechanic. The overall campaign strategy and diplomacy really isn't much of a step forward over previous games, but that's been a defining fault of CA's for a while now. The battle map really isn't a challenge for the player, unless you give the AI buffs by turning up the difficulty or you face a numerically superior force. The AI just doesn't know how to maneuver and flank and feint in the way that these battles played out in real life. That and once the shooting stops and units engage in melee, you really see the shortcomings of the warscape engine (which is a huge reason for why Rome 2 fell so hard on its face).

ETW isn't a bad game...Rome 2 takes the cake on that. It's decent enough, if the player has the right expectations. But I certainly wouldn't consider it the best of CA's games. Rome I and Medieval 2 really shocked and awed the gaming community with how innovative and standard-setting they were. ETW never really had that affect. It added new graphics, but otherwise it didn't do anything that the previous games hadn't already done. I can still remember fighting numerous hard-won battles in distant lands as the Romans in vanilla and Rome Total Realism, and I can remember even more vividly my Silvan Elf invasion of Mordor, which was hotly contested by Olag Hai Mordor stacks every step of the way. I was emotionally invested in those campaigns. I felt bad every time I took serious casualties (even in victory). I felt relief when I finally conquered the enemy's last settlements. Those were immersive games, both tactically and strategically, and there are dozens of battles and campaigns that I can remember for those gaming experiences; that's how much of an impression those games made on me. I can remember maybe remember 1-2 epic battles from my ETW campaigns (all of them via Darth Mod). ETW is a challenge in early and mid game, but if you've played your cards right, it's fairly boring and easy by late game....you can afford full stacks of high quality troops, you can easily defeat the AI's mediocre battle formations, and you can easily replenish your armies.

If CA goes back and does a redo for anything, it should be a Rome 3, to make up for the horrible mistake that was Rome 2.

[Patronus86]

Can't edit, but I meant to add to the post above: ETW did add naval battles, which is something previous TW games didn't have. ETW's naval battles are somewhat fun and definitely innovative within the strategy genre. But again, the AI's capacity to really manage these ships and formations is limited. The AI pretty much lines them up and sail straight for you, regardless of the wind direction. All I've had to do to defeat the naval AI is form 2 lines, envelop the enemy's single line, and fire into the enemy's stern and bow to cause them to quickly route or surrender...again early/mid game battles can be somewhat challenging when you have limited access to good ships, but by late game, the challenge is gone. Still naval battles are cool feature that ETW pioneered.

[onmy6]

Yes I'd have to agree with you there on the AI in the Total War franchise but then most if not all Strategic and Tactical games usually do fall down with regards to the AI if not immediately then eventually,
infact I would say the biggest complaint in these type of games is exactly that, AI strategy and/or tactics and AI diplomacy depending on the game.
It's to difficult to code in in alot of ways and it just can not compete with the human mind in emulation.
I know for example with Civ5, of which I use to mod, all that was done once the base strat and tac was coded in is build in cheats for each level of hardness for the AI, the high the level the bigger the cheat/s hardly brilliant but hey what can you do,
I guess you could build in mass spawning units like CA did with Attila on the campaign map but man what a yawn, no immersive feel whatsoever IMO,
wipe out Attila's spawned stack only to have 3 new stacks spawn a turn or 2 later and on and on it goes just one big yawn after awhile.
I do like RTW when using Roma Surrectum II or III and I still play that today on occasion and M2TW was a masterpiece in it's time, no doubt
but ETW for me once tweaked exactly right to my particular preference is my favorite, the only grip I have really have with ETW is the pathfinder algorithm when in fort sieges but you have
work arounds for that, either don't use cannons or disable settlement forts and it usually works OK

At the end of the day I guess it's like you said "to each their own"
but I think Rome/2 has had it's turn, medieval has had it's 2 goes and
shogun well I'm not even going there.

It's time for ETW2 this time though finished thoroughly and to completion!

(caveat: We all know that's never going to happen but hey dream big)

[Patronus86]

Well most of my ETW campaigns (all DME, as I don't like the vanilla version one bit) have been with big, strong western factions (Sweden, GB, France). So far I've found the challenge, on either the strategy or tactical map, to be mostly lacking, excepting some early and mid game encounters. You build enough trade routes and alliances and you're bank account expands at the rapid rate, letting buy whatever fleets and armies you want and reinforce as much as you want. The AI just doesn't know how to fight a battle (land or sea), nor do they know how to retrograde from a bad position or leave a battle to fight another day....there was no progression from the AI's capability in Rome or Medieval 2....that's what CA really needs to focus on for its next game, regardless of the time period it focuses on.

Maybe if I take the time to play some lesser known, smaller factions, my opinion will be different, but as it stands I just never really saw the challenge that I saw in earlier TW games. The immersion can be there with the right mods, but again, very few if any ETW mods really innovated the way that earlier TW mods did. Why is that I can recruit basic units from almost any enemy settlement 1 turn after conquering it? Why is that I can reinforce my depleted units in just about any town or city? Why is that the public order and disease issues never really play a factor? Why is there no family tree or character management? I remember the care and planning I had to put in my Roman campaigns with Rome Total Realism, since I could only recruit my top tier Roman infantry from my core Italian cities (and I think a few Spanish ones)...that meant after every big battle, I had to halt my campaign to reorganize and bring up reinforcements. I just haven't had to invest myself and plan the same way for any of my ETW campaigns, even with mods. The newer TW games are being dumbed down; my problem with ETW wasn't that it was a horrible game, because it was somewhat decent in certain aspects. My problem with it is it marked the beginning of CA's trend of 'stream-lining' and making these games more 'user friendly' for new players. TW players are mostly hardcore gamers...they should be making their games cater to that kind of crowd, not to the new player and definitely not the console crowd.

[Sar1n]

I have to agree that AI is a huge shortcoming of ETW, especially when it comes to land battles. You can win most land battles, even if you are outnumbered 3:1 on high difficulty, simply by assuming a good formation and waiting for enemy to piecemeal feed its units to your artillery.

[Gollum]

Yeah, it has to be reworked. The AI is terrible.

[groundpounder11B]

ETW did not have a lot of competition in same genre (American Revolution/1700s). It would be nice to have a mainstream game set between 1830-1880, it could include several different wars and have an interesting tech progression, while keeping most of ETW's style of gameplay.

[Torn]

What we all really need is a total war game with a campaign that has the immersion, depth and historical detail that paradox's games have. Not to mention how in their's you can just jump in at any time and take over any of the players. Really, besides the rts battles, Creative Assembly's works have nothing going for them. Each and every game they release has been salvaged and made playable due to the efforts of it's amazing modding community(and the fact CA has actually gone out of it's to reduce moddability in it's latest games, none of which imo match up to the moda on it's old games).

[Switz]

What we all really need is a total war game with a campaign that has the immersion, depth and historical detail that paradox's games have. Not to mention how in their's you can just jump in at any time and take over any of the players. Really, besides the rts battles, Creative Assembly's works have nothing going for them. Each and every game they release has been salvaged and made playable due to the efforts of it's amazing modding community(and the fact CA has actually gone out of it's to reduce moddability in it's latest games, none of which imo match up to the moda on it's old games).

I disagree some about mods being the only reason TW games survive. Sure, they keep them alive longer and have helped with sales, but I think overall CA built a great series even with vanilla settings.

This is not a disagree post, trust me, I want to see everything you just mentioned. Paradox games are SO ADDICTING yet the battles are well...not even there lol. If you could take both games and merge them together you would have gold written all over it.

But I can't say I fully agree that CA has not been giving us some awesome games with the TW series'. They are fun regardless, but 90% of that is due to the in game battle mechanics. All aspects of the game can improve, but I for one (and looks like you too) wants to see much MUCH much more immersion with the campaign. They took a step towards it with Rome 2 and hoping they keep going with the inner politics more, but the actual map aspects need a complete redesign.

[Alwyn]

Yes, more immersion with the campaign would be good. While a lot of people don't like the new Rome II mechanics, I would love to see some of the features of Rome II included in any new Empire game.

For example, combined land and sea battles would be exciting. We could send ships with their marines into enemy ports for 'cutting-out' expeditions (trying to capture enemy vessels from the port.) We could attempt to land troops under fire or try to prevent hostile troops from landing (as in the British expedition against Quebec during the French and Indian War).

The ability of factions to form confederations could add to diplomacy. I would enjoy playing as one of the Thirteen Colonies, trying to unite the colonies in a confederation so that a war of independence would become possible (the Thirteen Colonies/United States constitution during the American Revolutionary War was called the Articles of Confederation). Alternatively, we could play as a Native American faction uniting its neighbours to form the Iroquois Confederation, to resist incursions by the colonial powers. In both of those situations, players could have the option of forming a confederation through diplomacy, war or a mixture of both.

[General Gordon]

I vote for an Empire II consisting of:
- A complete playable world map
- Covering all the way up to and including the Napoleonic Wars

[Rick]

I vote for an Empire II consisting of:
- A complete playable world map
- Covering all the way up to and including the Napoleonic Wars

That would be very interesting, that's also my vote.

With all the rumors floating around who knows what CA is coming up with. One thing is sure, many of us are not buying another game (saving our money) until the new CA endeavor is released, or at least made known.

[irish437]

I have to agree that AI is a huge shortcoming of ETW, especially when it comes to land battles. You can win most land battles, even if you are outnumbered 3:1 on high difficulty, simply by assuming a good formation and waiting for enemy to piecemeal feed its units to your artillery.

I totally agree with this. There was a game out about 10 or 15 years ago called imperial glory. Each battle map had a couple strategic locations that had to be held in order to win the battle. It forced the attacker to aggressively attack. ETW needs that.

You have to make that a house rule in ETW. You have to advance your troops if you initiate the attack. Otherwise you can win every battle by playing defense. I have found the AI to be at least competent when I actively attack without pausing.

[Didz]

CA tried that idea in Rome 2 and had to abandon it after uproar from irate fans. It's an idea stolen from Game Workshop tabletop games and has no historical precedent.

[irish437]

CA tried that idea in Rome 2 and had to abandon it after uproar from irate fans. It's an idea stolen from Game Workshop tabletop games and has no historical precedent.

Attackers actually attacking has no historical precedent?

The problem with thew AI is that you can initiate the attack and then just play defense and win. How does that make any sense?

[Basileos Leandros I]

CA tried that idea in Rome 2 and had to abandon it after uproar from irate fans. It's an idea stolen from Game Workshop tabletop games and has no historical precedent.

Holding special places wasn't the thing of S2TW multiplayer?

Holding the temple, the armoury...

[poa]

its easy, just copy the original STW, the defender regardless of AI/player takes up a strong defensive position, because the attacker will lose if it doesnt win and drive off the defenders. ETW however dont have a strong defensive position because everything is flat, and even if it wasnt, fighting uphill means nothing in ETW, and for some reason, AI in ETW attack regardless if its defender or attacker, and favor taking a slow stroll to in front of guns within range of cannister shots, and then make halt and start duelling with cannister shots

[anant]

Honestly, Empire is my favourite total war game...just the dreamy scope, the variety of factions and units, the naval component and the trade theaters, and the emergent factions...playing mods which allow you to choose any faction (including emergent ones) and tweak the AI (ETW factions is one such mod) allows for expansive and immersive gameplay. Playing as Punjab (you'll have to engineer a constitutional monarchy cause you cant convert anyone!), or the Mamelukes (do you continue as a vassal or take over the ottmans?), or one of the native american factions (an Iriqious London, perhaps?) or Iran (with a lower level of tech but not a lower level of generalship, yes?) is something you simply can't do in any other Total war (where it's the same England, France, Spain etc. etc.). And of course, to see the Mughals or the Marathas take the UK does make me all misty eyed...So i would love a ETW2.0, but what i really want is a Victoria total war with a complete world map and many, many, many factions !! Hoping against hope i guess...

[Leonardo]

If CA goes back and does a redo for anything, it should be a Rome 3, to make up for the horrible mistake that was Rome 2.

If they are going back and release anything then it should be ETW2.

But what CA should really do is to either scrap the Warscape engine and get a new one, a lot better game engine than the buggy Warscape engine IMO, or definitely fix the bugs in the Warscape engine then releasing new games. Instead of making new games without fixing the bugs in the current game engine and RTW2 is an excellent example of making a less *good* game.