Empire Total War - naval battle gameplay trailer released

[Sonarman]

Gametrailers.com has some gameplay footage (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/252537.html) of the naval battles in the forthcoming Empire total war

[Raptor1]

Ugh, we have to wait until February...

Naval battles were one of the things I missed the most in the Total War series (Mostly in Rome), good to see they're adding them in the era where they're really needed

[Mush Martin]

:doh:that looks really awesome.

[tater]

Wow, that looks cool. Wonder if it will have fantasy sailing like potbs.

Probably.

[tater]

Just as I feared:

While watching gameplay of the naval fights, Mark spelled out the company's approach to the subject. "We are creating a naval battle with wind, maneuverability and ammo types," he says, "but it's important to stress that we're not going out of our way to create a rigid naval simulation in terms of the sailing aspect." That's in keeping with the series' goals of creating the impression of historical fighting without necessarily getting bogged down in tiresome details.

More eye candy with no substance.

[Captain Vlad]

That's the philosiphy they've stuck too for every Total War game thus far. They've yet to make a weak or uninvolving game.

[tater]

I wouldn't know, I've not bought any of them. Course I also maintain that RTS games are neither real time (NONE are, obviously), nor strategy (most are more tactical).

None the less, I'd dearly love to see a good age of fighting sail simulator. Contrary to what some have said on other boards (potbs, for example), there is no reason why a realistic sailing model has to be too hard for players to master. It's entirely a question of the UI for the game. In addition, with the player as Captain (or Admiral), there is no need for them to be overly concerned with HOW the ship does what they wish, just that it does it as well as possible. For an "EZ mode" give your ship an AI sailing master. As skipper, you order the boat to be placed at pistol shot from the target, on the same tack, and the Master makes it happen.

From an interface standpoint, you could have the ability to place a target marked on the sea, and the game would draw a rough path line showing how the ship would get where you want it placed. If the target point is upwind, it could draw tacks to get you there, and you could hit a key to swap wearing for tacking, and sliders for the length of the legs of the tacks (down to the minimum possible length based on crew and timing).

Anyway, it could be done so that as skipper you are concerned with the path the ship takes, but the officers and men make it happen. It need not require the player to reef every sail by hand.

SH suffers the same poor paradigm for the position of the player, BTW. We either have to do ALL the jobs, or it's made ridiculously easy. Ideally, the player would be skipper, and his firing party would plot his observations, etc. We'd have a model between what we call 100% realism—which unrealistically requires the captain to do jobs he never did in RL), and auto targeting which is is joke.

UI is everything.

[Captain Vlad]

I wouldn't know, I've not bought any of them. Course I also maintain that RTS games are neither real time (NONE are, obviously), nor strategy (most are more tactical).

They're quite good. How much do you know about them, interface wise? Only the battles are 'real time'.

None the less, I'd dearly love to see a good age of fighting sail simulator.

Me too, but I wasn't expecting one from Empire: Total War. Producing a full on sailing sim would be a massive project if you wanted to do it justice, and naval battles are only part of the whole.

[tater]

Even battles in RTS games are sped up. Or do napoleonic battles take days sometimes (real days)?

Sorry, I'm just being pedantic :)

As for age of fighting sail, I keep seeing games that LOOK fantastic, and I wish they were built with the bones to make them realistic.

It needn't be painfully realistic, just realistic enough to simulate outcomes. All the stuff we see with fantasy sailing makes things like The Battle of the Nile impossible.

[Captain Vlad]

Even battles in RTS games are sped up. Or do napoleonic battles take days sometimes (real days)?

I've even seen that problem even in turn based games, with multiple days of a particular battle being their own scenario, without any carry over of casualties, morale, etc. And these weren't crap games, either. Ever play Age of Rifles?

Day and night cycles and other such would be a neat thing to see in a Total War type game, though it does beg the question on whether that level of 'single battle' detail would serve that kind of game.

As for age of fighting sail, I keep seeing games that LOOK fantastic, and I wish they were built with the bones to make them realistic.

Might be marketing more than anything else. While it's entirely realistic to be at the mercy of the wind, how many people want to play a game where that's accurately simulated?

[tater]

I do. I don;t think POTBS is doing terribly well, are they? I think that had they made sailing more interesting, there'd be FAR more replay ability. In a world of magical windward sailing, all the battles become slug fests.

As I said, realistic sailing does NOT require grognard like detail. No individual sail controls are needed, it's the end results that matter.

You can have a momentum indicator that shows if the ship will make stays tacking, for example, if you won't get through the eye of the wind, you have no choice but to sail on close-hauled, wear, or miss stays trying (might be useful to bring guns to bear rarely).

Fudging the wind in a sailing game is like messing with gravity and lift in a flight sim.

[Captain Vlad]

I do.

I'd play it as well. But I've adored games that were definite niche products before, and while I can lament the fact that more specialized games aren't made, I do understand why they're not as common, heavily budgeted, etc.

This is, of course, counter-balanced by the fact that, if it's done really well, any game can find a market.

I don't think POTBS is doing terribly well, are they?

Despite great interest, I haven't got to play it. The satellite connection giveth, the satellite connection taketh away.

How'd you think of how sailing was handled in the latest version of Pirates?

[ajrimmer42]

Omg, that just made me want it even more! Well, that and the fact I just visited HMS Victory. Empire is certainly looking good!

[TheBrauerHour]

Interesting. I was involved in the closed beta of PotBS, and I left due to the lack of realism. The closed beta forums were filled with complaints about the direction the game was going. When they announced they would add magical content, I told them I was gone.

Anyone who has read Patrick O'brian or at least watched Master and Commander knows what type of game I would like. Maybe it is a niche, but seeing how many people were dissapointed by PotBS, and knowing that everyone I hang out with also wants a true depiction of the Age of Sail makes me think that an accurate game would do well.

Part of the fun is sailing and the fact that the wind must be a primary factor in any engagement.

[Raptor1]

I like PotBS very much (Though I still think introducing the Supernatural content was stupid), but I guess it's a matter of taste

I would also like a game that accurately depicts 18th century naval combat though

[AJ!]

I like PotBS very much (Though I still think introducing the Supernatural content was stupid), but I guess it's a matter of taste

I would also like a game that accurately depicts 18th century naval combat though

Supernatural content?
I played PotBS a few months ago and found it alright. I liked the naval combat because it was light hearted and looked nice. I gave up though because im just not a mass multiplayer person. I think the problem is you have to dedicate too much of your time to leveling up which just makes me think i could be doing something better with my time. I got to level 13 after hours of playing and as always with these games it gets to the point where it takes 3 hours just to level up once.... :doh:

Back on subject though i do hope they do a half realistic job here. It looks fantastic so far but the one bit i didnt like was those trails left by the cannonballs. I know the odd shot would leave a faint trail but these are full on white lines :down:
Have a good look at one of the first broadsides in the trailer if your not sure what im on about.

[stabiz]

The devs have said these trails will be optional, I believe.

[AJ!]

The devs have said these trails will be optional, I believe.

Now if that is true then that has just made my day :up::up:

[tater]

Interesting. I was involved in the closed beta of PotBS, and I left due to the lack of realism. The closed beta forums were filled with complaints about the direction the game was going. When they announced they would add magical content, I told them I was gone.

Anyone who has read Patrick O'brian or at least watched Master and Commander knows what type of game I would like. Maybe it is a niche, but seeing how many people were dissapointed by PotBS, and knowing that everyone I hang out with also wants a true depiction of the Age of Sail makes me think that an accurate game would do well.

Part of the fun is sailing and the fact that the wind must be a primary factor in any engagement.

I wasn't in any betas od POTBS, I left when I saw the change in direction from the devs in the forums. I hung around posting for a while, trying to get digs in (realistic feeling vs magical sailing) but to no avail.

Here's the deal.

The age of sail is fascinating from a role-playing standpoint with the player as an officer/captain. It offers cool ship combat, hand to hand, cutting out, sending parties to on shore to attack land targets (gun batteries, etc).

Part of what makes such things challenging is the wind. Blockading harbors works because there are limited times and places ships can leave due to the wind. Accurate at some base level—again, I don't require player control of every single staysail, etc—means replay ability. You can have the same French Frigate vs British frigate action, and with variable wind conditions, it would be fun and different every single time. Strikes me in POTBS (or similar), the only difference might be randomness in the damage models.

Sailing is everything to an age of sail game. I can even see for multiplayer speeding up time, so that engagements take less time. More important is not allowing ships to sail past close-hauled without towing (and only then in light wind after manning the boats (at GQ, they should have been hoisted out and trailed astern with a painter anyway).

I see all these games and it makes me sad there is no way to mod the awesome models into something realistic. I'd be all over a good frigate level age of sail game like a bad suit.

[stabiz]

The devs have said these trails will be optional, I believe.
Now if that is true then that has just made my day :up::up:

I am 99% sure someone from CA said this in a thread at twcenter, the reason for these trails is so you will easier see whats shooting at what.

Anyway, if its not an option its probably the first mod we will see.

In other news Empire is supposedly easier to modify, and a WW1-mod is allready announced.:rock:

[Raptor1]

WW1? I wonder if that'll work

What I would like to see is the game going into the Victorian era either through a mod or an expansion, going from ca. 1830 to ca. 1895, that would be great

[tater]

One thing about wind specific to the AoE idea of a more strategic look at things. Wind is HUGELY important for Napoleonic naval strategy. The RN's blockades were very highly wind dependent, as were French chances at slipping out of port. Part of what made different ports, coasts, and islands strategically important had to do with prevailing winds. Not including wind would be like not having "General Winter" in Bonny's campaign into Russia.

Just saying.

Naval stuff always gets the short end of the stick.

tater

[AJ!]

In all fairness tater, People over at the other total war forums seem to be at the same conclusion that the naval aspect of empire has had a lot more time and effort spent on it then the land battles. This has come about due to the quality of some of the land screenshots which i think look fine apart from the poor quality in the town shot which looks worse then M2TW.

That WW1 mod sounds fantastic. Trench warfare and dreadnoughts sounds good :up:

[Raptor1]

Sheesh, you make it sound like wind will not effect anything at all...

[AJ!]

Sheesh, you make it sound like wind will not effect anything at all...

CA have already stated that wind will play a big part in the naval battles although things will be alittle faster for game play purposes. I see what tater means about AoS games having a lack of realism but theres got to be line drawn for gaming. ;)

[tater]

Can you sail into the wind, regardless of speed, yes, or no?

If you can always steer the way you want, then it is exactly analogous to a flight sim with no gravity.

For example, take a strategic level movement of a squadron. You order 8 sail of the line, and as many frigates to the West Indies. If ships can always sail into the wind (or even with NO wind) at 3 knots, then there is a maximum time for transit. It might be shorter, but it would NEVER be longer. In reality, transit times across the Atlantic were extremely variable. On squadron gets stuck in the doldrums for weeks, another barely hits them, gets the Trades, and is on its way. The transit times and uncertainties are critically important for trying to have a strategic scale game.

That's another reason "real time strategy" games are not real time, not strategy. They are tactical, effectively since the real strategic thinking is gone.

Going back to an old grognard sci fi board game, 5th Frontier War did a great job of getting that age of sail feel since travel took time, as did ORDERS. In that game a turn was one week, and you needed to plot movements 5 weeks in advance. There were some admiral counters that could be in fleets, and would allow them to act independently. Cool idea, though.

That would be neat in a Napoleonic game, to have to send forces with orders, and they only have limited latitude to act outside their orders. The player would have an imposed fog of war, and would only see the situation at the point he hears about it (riders sent with information, or ships sent with dispatches, etc).

I can dream :)

[Raptor1]

That would be kinda hard to simulate when the startegic game is turn-based and each turn takes 1-2 years, wouldn't it?

They couldn't do something like this even if they wanted to

[tater]

I didn't realize the strat game was so long. Wow. Another reason I won't be playing this. I'm all for turn-based, board/miniatures grognard that I am, but even 1 year is too long for any sort of meaningful game that involves combat at all. 1-3 months per turn, maybe. Even 6 months is OK but coarse. Diplomacy was a simple game, after all.

[Raptor1]

Well, thinking about it, I don't know how long it will take, Medieval II was 2 years a turn, but this will probably be shorter (11th-15th century as opposed to 18th-19th centuries), so I don't know how long the turns will take

If the turns are shorter (3 months or so), putting a random factor on how far exactly ships will travel down the path you gave them might be the best idea

[AJ!]

What i want to know is how the capital ships of the different navies will be used in game. The total war series has never really used unique units. All the men would be generic and their loss wouldn't mean anything. With ships however we would have the famous capital ships like HMS victory and Le Redoutable. Would such ships be available to us or will we just be using generic ships that if lost would be simple to replace.

I hope its alot harder to build ships in this game. I also hope first rate ships cost a hell of alot of money and have some sort of strict cap on how many you could have. I also hope it takes alot of time to build these. It would be stupid if they had a system like the other games when you could build a whole fleet in one turn. :shifty:

[Raptor1]

Caps on how many First Rates you can build - NO!, there weren't any in real life so there shouldn't be any here, the only cap there should be is the fact that building those is a huge money and resource hog (Well, they were in real life)

I think the most plausible naming solution for ships would be to have a list of names for the different types of ships and have the game assign them automatically (A sunken or broken up ship's name goes back in the list), kinda like in Victoria (It would suck very much if all ships are named the same)

[AJ!]

"the only cap there should be is the fact that building those is a huge money and resource hog"

That is what i am getting at ;)

Ok a cap would be a bit stupid but what i don't want to see is a country poring out 200 first rate ships per turn because they have the money.

Do we know yet how much variation there will be between countries navies? From what the bloke said in one of the interviews there are something like 25 different ship types. That includes steam ships so im not sure how much variation we will get :shifty:

[Raptor1]

If he refers to the ship types (Different types of SoLs, Frigates, Sloops-of-War), there shouldn't really be that much of a problem as most ships of those types were essentially identical except for some minor stuff, like the gun types (A British 74-gun Third Rate and a French 74-gun Third Rate are both 4-masted Full-rigged ships with 74 guns, aren't they?)

Hell, the British even copied the Téméraire's design in 1793

Though I hope they have several different models and slightly different stats for each ship type and nation, so ships don't look and play exactly the same

[AJ!]

It will be interesting to see how the weather will affect gameplay as well. They said that snow storms would affect the visibility and rate of fire. Rain will affect gunpowder which will add alot of strategic decisions to the table :up: