Empire : Total War

Recommended Videos

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
The launch of Medieval Total War back in 2002, for me, marked the beginning of a series that came the closest to what I thought was strategy game perfection. Being a hardcore medieval battles fan with appreciation for the finer points of placing your archers high up the hill and pikemen in front of them while waiting for your enemies to come, I immediately fell in love with the game, and spent the most part of the coming year playing the campaign with different factions over different difficulty levels. After that, me and my friend who was a history buff, used to describe our recent conquests and strategies, heroic victories and the like.

It's been 7 years since then, and I've played for almost the same amount of time both, Medieval II Total war and Rome Total War. Now with the launch of Empire Total War, my last wish was answered and naval battles are now included.

So I'll just jump over the story directly. The game lets you start at 1700 with a few of the major nations of the time. You can choose through the campaign way, short, prestige or global domination which basically changes your objectives and nothing much more aside from how long you're allowed to play. There is also the option of playing the American Revolution (I think) but I haven't tried that yet.

Gameplay wise the game has some new elements combined with the old ones which gave flavor to the Total War series. Most noticeable is the appearance of 2 new theaters, America and India, as well as trade locations such as Africa, Brazil. The second noticeable difference between the games that prefaced Empire, is the way buildings are constructed. No longer are buildings built only in the region capital. The regions which have been merged to leave a few less provinces to capture during the game have been given a region capital, which holds all major government buildings, which in effect dictates who holds the region as well as a few towns that grow in size as time progresses, which the player then can upgrade to do different things. Examples include blacksmiths, weavers, pleasure gardens, schools, churches, farms, trade ports, shipyards and fisheries. Also, the number of capital buildings has been somewhat reduced, but considering the adjacent towns and their building options, the difference is not that worrying.

A new addition to gameplay is the tech tree. The other Total War games did not include research, so this, came a bit as a surprise to me, and took a bit of getting used to. The tech tree is large and varied enough, even though I worry if I will finish researching it way before the end of the campaign. Philosophic research influences the population which has been divided into lower, middle and nobility classes, and they are also influenced by the traits of your governing cabinet, which I am quite unsure as how they get them. Agents like spies, gentlemen (researchers) and missionaries are no longer recruited but spawned depending on the buildings in your regions. Diplomats are no longer used.

Taking advantage of the new theaters as well as naval mechanics, new options of trade (like the merchants in Medieval 2) are now available by using Indiamen ships to trade with the different ports in the trade theaters, although the inability to trade with the same port another country is trading with (which you are not at war with) seems a bit odd. Also the revenue from the trade agreements is more noticeable.

Land combat is fairly unchanged aside from the annoying fences which seem to be more of a challenge to cavalry and infantry than it would seem. Houses can now be garrisoned and cannons have really really bad accuracy at long distance. But at least they don't blow up as they did in medieval. Also the fact that most units now have muskets needs to have long time players of the Total War series, rethink their strategies. Times have changed, so have the weapons. It's time for a strategy change as well.

Naval combat, which seems to be this game's main selling point is really really well done, in my honest opinion. The ship names and diagrams have been used in modeling the ships and behaviors (as the game lets us know at the starting screen) which gives this "small" game even more of a historical touch, which is golden for a history lover like myself.

The graphics are at the expected level, although the sounds are a bit missing. Aside from the music, I would have loved to hear cannon fire and musket fire, but maybe I have missed some settings.

All in all, a great game, worth a great wait. I cannot wait to actually get used to the new options in order to make the best of all the new and interesting tools that the games place at the feet of all would be emperors.

Buy it.

((Writer's note. Feedback, of any sort is appreciated))

EDIT : Due to numerous observations I added "for me" in the first sentence to carefully say what I meant. I didn't mean the series started then, I meant that Medieval was the game that started the series for me, as we all know reviews are subjective articles and all that is said is said through the prism of the author.
 

kawligia

New member
Feb 24, 2009
779
0
0
I plan to get it if/when they patch it up. Or at least until the community does it for them.
 

wedrinkritalin

New member
Aug 21, 2008
28
0
0
I love this game, playing as Prussia, Poland and Austria just went to war, so I prosper and have most of the north under my control,
 

AlphaOmega

New member
Oct 10, 2008
1,732
0
0
Nice enough revieuw and I am really tempted to get it, but I might aswell drop the question I had in here:

I loved the campaign/conquest maps in ME2, but I still find their armies HORRENDEUS to controll and the formation tool is utterly frustrating at times.

is pathing/moving in formation still that bad?
 

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
Yes, actually I forgot to mention a bit of frustration with the AI, but considering most of the battles will be handled automatically (at least I do that unless I am really really tempted to do a show of strength or my army is vastly outnumbered) it really doesn't hamper gameplay that much.
 

Novajam

New member
Apr 26, 2008
965
0
0
I think you've written a really nice sort of review here. Though you've got me wondering about a few things:

Ronwue said:
Diplomats are no longer used.
What replaces Diplomats then? Or is diplomacy thrown by the wayside altogether?

Ronwue said:
The launch of Medieval Total War back in 2002 marked the beginning of a series that came the closest to what I thought was strategy game perfection. Being a hardcore medieval battles fan with appreciation for the finer points of placing your archers high up the hill and pikemen in front of them while waiting for your enemies to come, I immediately fell in love with the game, and spent the most part of the coming year playing the campaign with different factions over different difficulty levels. After that, me and my friend who was a history buff, used to describe our recent conquests and strategies, heroic victories and the like.
And as much as I love the way you've written this introduction, Shogun: Total War [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shogun_total_war] was actually the first game in the series.

Apart from that, great work. I'll have to give the game a go once my new computer is built.
 

Danny Ocean

Master Archivist
Jun 28, 2008
4,148
0
0
Novajam said:
I think you've written a really nice sort of review here. Though you've got me wondering about a few things:

Ronwue said:
Diplomats are no longer used.
What replaces Diplomats then? Or is diplomacy thrown by the wayside altogether?

Apart from that, great work. I'll have to give the game a go once my new computer is built.
There's a separate diplomacy screen. Presumably to represent relative ease of communication.
 

Undeadpope

New member
Feb 4, 2009
289
0
0
The total war series seems like something I would like,but the problem being it seems to be a bit war tactics(and proably an very large amount of it)whereas I prefer the Civ series because of the mutliply approachs(note,just my thoughts,I ll proably download the demo off steam now).
 

Musicfreak

New member
Jan 23, 2009
197
0
0
Not a bad review, personaly I found contolling my armys and their movements to be easier once I learned how to fully utilize the interface at the bottom. although I have yet to really enjoy the sea battles yet, but that is mostly because I am just downright terrible at them.
 

imPacT31

New member
Mar 19, 2008
142
0
0
wedrinkritalin said:
I love this game, playing as Prussia, Poland and Austria just went to war, so I prosper and have most of the north under my control,
(I thought playing as Prussia was going to be an absolute nightmare but Austria managed to sever their alliances with Britain and the United Provinces just in time for me to waltz over their borders unopposed)

Quite a nice review really. I actually found the game easier to get used to, tactically speaking, thanks to my general incompetence with Medieval 2. Now that armies revolve around large numbers of line infantry I don't have to worry so much about balancing close and ranged combat units.

I'd like to have heard whether you though the game is more complicated than the last, I found the campaign near incomprehensible at first, and was almost put off entirely by how confused I was by the sheer level of detail.

I also agree about the fences; while slightly impeding infantry and cavalry movement doesn't seem like a problem I've actually had Grenadiers refuse to use grenades on an enemy sheltering behind a fence without crossing it themselves first.
 

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
Novajam said:
I think you've written a really nice sort of review here. Though you've got me wondering about a few things:

Ronwue said:
Diplomats are no longer used.
What replaces Diplomats then? Or is diplomacy thrown by the wayside altogether?

Ronwue said:
The launch of Medieval Total War back in 2002 marked the beginning of a series that came the closest to what I thought was strategy game perfection. Being a hardcore medieval battles fan with appreciation for the finer points of placing your archers high up the hill and pikemen in front of them while waiting for your enemies to come, I immediately fell in love with the game, and spent the most part of the coming year playing the campaign with different factions over different difficulty levels. After that, me and my friend who was a history buff, used to describe our recent conquests and strategies, heroic victories and the like.
And as much as I love the way you've written this introduction, Shogun: Total War [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shogun_total_war] was actually the first game in the series.

Apart from that, great work. I'll have to give the game a go once my new computer is built.
The diplomacy screen has its own tab now which is a bit weird at first, but really useful. I suppose we're in the era where diplomatic contact between entities was permanent. No red phone but close.

I know Shogun was the first one which was launched, but I have not played it, hence that is why it is not mentioned.
 

cannot_aim

New member
Dec 18, 2008
392
0
0
It's a good game but I think they made it just a little to bit like civilization. It's still great but the graphics are a little strange and they changed a lot of things without really needing to. All in all though I love empire and all total war games I just hope they tone down the Civilization esque gameplay and focus back on the Total War part in the next installment.
 

Seekster

New member
May 28, 2008
319
0
0
I believe that once Empire Total War is finished then it will be a truly great Strategy Game. Unfortunately, unlike most good games, ETW was released before it was finished meaning that unless you have a spiffy computer or get very very lucky you will have a really really buggy game. This is made worse by the fact that even despite the bugs it is still somewhat fun and you want to keep playing but then the text becomes scrambled or the game crashes or you find the game wont let you go to Qubec and you have to restart and hope it magically fixes itself or wait until the devs release a patch that actually finishes the game.

Other than that yeah its good but its not a complete game yet imo.
 

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
imPacT31 said:
wedrinkritalin said:
I love this game, playing as Prussia, Poland and Austria just went to war, so I prosper and have most of the north under my control,
(I thought playing as Prussia was going to be an absolute nightmare but Austria managed to sever their alliances with Britain and the United Provinces just in time for me to waltz over their borders unopposed)

Quite a nice review really. I actually found the game easier to get used to, tactically speaking, thanks to my general incompetence with Medieval 2. Now that armies revolve around large numbers of line infantry I don't have to worry so much about balancing close and ranged combat units.

I'd like to have heard whether you though the game is more complicated than the last, I found the campaign near incomprehensible at first, and was almost put off entirely by how confused I was by the sheer level of detail.

I also agree about the fences; while slightly impeding infantry and cavalry movement doesn't seem like a problem I've actually had Grenadiers refuse to use grenades on an enemy sheltering behind a fence without crossing it themselves first.
The Prussia campaign start is perfect for me really. I love taking up small nations and taking over the world with them. Same thing happened to me really. Britain and the United Provinces just got bored of Austria and I attacked those blue and white flag guys west of them with who they had alliance. They obviously attacked me, but it 5 turns my conquest of Austria was over because I was prepared.

As I said in the review, the game mixes old with new, and whatever complexity would be brought in, would have its impact lessened by the known elements. But in truth the game seems a bit more complex. For example, I can't play the British campaign yet, because I'm too damn confused.
 

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
cannot_aim said:
It's a good game but I think they made it just a little to bit like civilization. It's still great but the graphics are a little strange and they changed a lot of things without really needing to. All in all though I love empire and all total war games I just hope they tone down the Civilization esque gameplay and focus back on the Total War part in the next installment.
You'll have to go into detail on the civilization part. I don't really get your meaning.
 

Ronwue

New member
Oct 22, 2008
607
0
0
urprobablyright said:
*before reading much of the review* shogun was the first TW game
Yes, I know. I've said after why I have started with Medieval and not Shogun.