Original Link

The Following is the beginings of a thread on the Empire:TW Forums i think exemplifies the issues with the game and this companies management in general.


Author
HenryClinton
CA please make the "Naval game enhancement" an optional upgrade through steam
Posts: 22
07/30/09 09:18:01
Tags : None
I am quite concerned about the "naval enhancement:" proposal to give ships of the line shorter range (and less accurate) guns than smaller ships (especially sloops)! This makes no sense as only the bigger ships could mount the bigger guns with the longer range and you wouldn't put your worst gunners and officers on your best ships! I have no problem with the smaller ships being more manueverable than the larger ships. Why is CA concerned that there are not enough smaller ships in the battles? If that is a concern, why not just make the smaller ships cheaper and the larger ships more expensive? Implementing a "rock, scissors, paper" concept into navy battles will not be an improvement if it is done by implementing wildly inaccurate changes. It appears I am not the only one concerned about the proposed "naval gameplay enhancement." Why not make it an optional upgrade?

#1
[url]
[-]

Posts: 180
07/30/09 09:23:42
Yeah i agree with the bigger ships bigger guns should have bigger range and accuracy. But there already is a naval enhancement discussion thread.
#2
[url]
[-]

Posts: 179
07/30/09 16:13:43
Yeah, how's that going to turn up in multiplayer? No thank you.

#3
[url]
[-]

Posts: 48
07/30/09 20:22:16
It's pretty dumb. I'm having a hard time understanding why they think it's such a big issue, and why they think the proposed changes would be an acceptable solution. Isn't the fact that a small ship can outmaneuver and outrun a larger ship enough of an advantage? They're also much, much cheaper. So yeah... what's the problem? And if there is a problem, why can't it be fixed by modifiying other in-game stats in more authentic and non-gamebreaking ways? Very bad idea, both historically and from a game-play perspective. Frigates and certain small vessels will emerge victorious (after very long, tedious, and unauthentic battles), while most other ships will literally be left in the dust... sea spray, whatever. I.E... Ship of the line: Pros: Can destroy anything it can catch Can take a lot of damage before sinking Cons: Can't catch anything Will take a lot of damage before sinking *yawn*

#4
[url]
[-]

Posts: 14
07/30/09 20:48:15
Yeah it sucks i know. There has already been the big outcry and CA frankly said they know what's better for us and they're doing it anyway. While they're at it though i want them to give my generals mana and spells so they have a greater role on the 18th century battle field. In addition firelock will need a bigger role also so they can go around and collect souls of the dead to provide a boost to your generals mana level. It's not exactly historically accurate i know but i'm having to make this sacrifice for a better game play experience for all Total War fans. :)

#5
[url]
[-]

Posts: 48
07/30/09 23:51:16
How about giving ships of the line the ability to summon creatures of sailor lore? Sirens could soothe the crew of enemy ships, causing them to stay still long enough for the ships of the line to catch up to them. Krakens could appear from the water, crippling enemy ships. Bring in Charybdis and Scylla from Homer's writings, etc. Age of Mythology: Total War! Hyperbole... maybe. But we're already making realism walk the plank to satisfy gameplay issues, so why not take it to the extreme... make it interesting? Or, you know, fix the issue in a way that makes more sense. The OP's suggestion of price/upkeep makes sense, or modifying the other stats slightly to accomodate whatever is broken in the view of developers. It's that or sea creatures, imo.


#6
[url]
[-]

Posts: 208
07/31/09 00:05:19
I second the original poster!


Shireknight
#7
[url]
[-]

Posts: 8816
07/31/09 00:23:43
Administrator
CA are not just waiting until the patch is ready and then throwing this addition in as the very last thing you know. Clearly Jack and other CA testers have already installed these changes in their current games and they are working just fine otherwise the naval changes would be scrapped and the chances are they would never have even been mentioned in the first place so lets wait until WE get our hands on patch 1.4 and see what we think then shall we? before we start dismissing an idea that no-one here has even so much as seen in action yet.


#8
[url]
[-]

Posts: 1709
07/31/09 00:35:09
I like these new changes! And stop being haters!!

Elyrioth

#9
[url]
[-]

Posts: 2283
07/31/09 01:03:59
Post-Captain
Given the sheer opposition to the change across multiple forums surely CA need to realize they need to give more details if they think we are wrong, or take what users actually want into account. I have seen CA backtrack before hopefully they will this time. I can't understand why they are working on unnecessary and unwanted changes when they should be working on nothing except the broken AI and Diplomacy. I am sure if CA do not make it an optional update a mod will come out rapidly to roll back the changes they made.......
Last Edited By: Elyrioth 07/31/09 01:09:02. Edited 2 times.
PDAquinas

#10
[url]
[-]
Posts: 84
07/31/09 01:47:03
Elyrioth wrote:
I can't understand why they are working on unnecessary and unwanted changes when they should be working on nothing except the broken AI and Diplomacy. +1 I can't be alone that I have shelved the game after desperately trying to forgive it's many problems for too long. I am a little stumped as to why they would be devoting time and energy to 'fixing' something that was working better than most other main aspects of the game. Unless, as I have seen a few posts suggesting, the game really is aimed at kids there is no way for me to get my head round how they think they have sold any form of strategy game. The AI and diplomacy issues leave it as a glorified battle simulator with issues combined with a broken 'campaign' walkthrough.
Alizea1

#11
[url]
[-]

Posts: 48
07/31/09 02:10:20
Elyrioth wrote:
Given the sheer opposition to the change across multiple forums surely CA need to realize they need to give more details if they think we are wrong, or take what users actually want into account. I have seen CA backtrack before hopefully they will this time. I can't understand why they are working on unnecessary and unwanted changes when they should be working on nothing except the broken AI and Diplomacy. Amen. That should be priority #1. If they don't fix those issues, patch 1.4 fails. Sure we can wait for the patch to come out to comment, but what's wrong with speculation given that we have some of the details which we know are a bit far-fetched? Why were those details provided if not to give us an idea of changes to come? You don't always need to have your hands on something to have an idea of what it will be like. Also, whatever changes go live are unlikely to be changed, reverted for quite some time. This seems like the perfect time to speak out against it. I've seen plenty of things go live, let alone just make it to the testing phase, that were not good ideas for a game. I feel this is one of them, and obviously a lot of people agree. It's not a matter of "hating"... quite the contrary, it's speaking out on behalf of a game you like. I would not even be on these forums if I was not enjoying this game & had no desire to see it improve.

Master of War

#12
[url]
[-]

Posts: 208
07/31/09 04:55:51
PDAquinas wrote:
I am a little stumped as to why they would be devoting time and energy to 'fixing' something that was working better than most other main aspects of the game. Unless, as I have seen a few posts suggesting, the game really is aimed at kids there is no way for me to get my head round how they think they have sold any form of strategy game. The AI and diplomacy issues leave it as a glorified battle simulator with issues combined with a broken 'campaign' walkthrough. Halleluja! I agree on the first one - naval battles are one of the features of this game that actually work! Why bother making any changes!!!! And even more so on the second one!! So true. And in the words of Metallica and so many others: Sad but true.

HenryClinton

#13
[url]
[-]

Posts: 22
07/31/09 05:41:04
Ingkala - What's going to happen to multiplayer when legions of players won't be playing online because they don't want the naval "enhancement" that comes with the new patch? If CA plows forward with this concept over the objections of the bulk of its most vocal fans many will be left with a hard choice: Do I live with the game in its present state including bugs in trade, the inability to kick a common enemy out of an ally's port, some flaws in the AI and a broken fast forward button (it kind of speaks to the overall quality of the game that it is otherwise good enough that I am still playing with these issues) or do I download a patch that might fix some or all of these problems, but that may completely ruin the naval experience? At least if the "naval enhancement" was optional the choice would come down to only this: Do I care enough about the ability to play multiplayer that I will live with the "naval enhancement"?

Fencible

#14
[url]
[-]

Posts: 76
07/31/09 08:52:12
HenryClinton wrote:
I am quite concerned about the "naval enhancement:" proposal to give ships of the line shorter range (and less accurate) guns than smaller ships (especially sloops)! This makes no sense as only the bigger ships could mount the bigger guns with the longer range and you wouldn't put your worst gunners and officers on your best ships! I have no problem with the smaller ships being more manueverable than the larger ships. Totally agree! Proposed changes ruin the naval game for me, unless they can assure us that their changes can be reversed by modders. Sorry to all those who prefer adding magic bonus laser guns to sloops to make things more 'fun' - but I just can't agree with you. It does NOT make the game more fun for the rest of us - it cheapens and degrades it. Sloops are already too powerful for no visible or logical reason! There is always 'Warcraft', and dozens of other such wearisome games for those who prefer total fantasy 'fun'. I prefer that 'Empire' remain an alternate history sort of game, not an alternate physics fantasy world. Sincerely, Fencible

ShadeWar

#15
[url]
[-]

Posts: 99
07/31/09 09:09:47
Wasn't there another game that released a patch called 'the NGE' anyone remember what happened to that game, specifically what the fans did?

EQ Snarf

#16
[url]
[-]

Posts: 63
07/31/09 09:15:16
While I'm not opposed to the changes (I'm sure modders will undo the changes) I do agree that there are better things to spend their time working on.

Blackula

#17
[url]
[-]

Posts: 9
07/31/09 11:49:27
ShadeWar wrote:
Wasn't there another game that released a patch called 'the NGE' anyone remember what happened to that game, specifically what the fans did? Haha yeah...this other game was Star Wars Galaxies. I started playing it after the NGE hit but what happened in a nutshell was SOE made massive changes to the core of the game. It caused a majority of the playbase to quit & the game never really recovered.



/END Post (as of 7/31 1500 Eastern time)

I suspect this thread will go to the land of locked and/or deleted as do most posts of a less than complentary nature on this forum.

Anyways, I promised one of those Nazi's i wouldnt post on their forums anymore so therefore...

The proposed changes and time-sink those still working on this project from Creative Assembly (Sega rather, CA claims "we are one! haha) are unneeded and pointless as well as ridiculus for Multiplayer vrs purposes. As this thread is headed in a amusing direction of making examples of what other games have done I must say thus' There is one key difference, with Empire, they already have our money. Its not like we can get it back.



Shireknight- you sir, are a fuckwit kiss-ass. The same people you are constantly so religiously defending also released this game in the laughable state it STILL FUCKING IS IN 6 MONTHS LATER. And they even called it "finished" and defended it as so. so fucking funny.

It must be cheap to bribe game mags & reviewers...or perhaps there really was some benefit to being in Mother Sega's pocket.

{this post has not been proof read or spell checked in any way whatsoever, obviously. :) }

Good Morning!

Figured I'd drop a line to anyone who may actually be reading this regarding an oldie but a goodie that has once again brought itself into the light.

Dungeons & Dragons Online

DDO experienced a rather fouled up release (as do most mmo's) by sending the incorrect keys out with preorders collectors editions vrs normal release edition. Essentially, if you had the normal version, you got the preorder goodies because the keys were switched. Meaning, if you ordered the special version, you got NADA as you had a normal key in the package. To my knowledge, though they did eventually fix this by giving the "special" customers what they originally paid for, it just took a couple weeks into release and ultimately we paid extra for nothing as all the normal boxes got the same shit we did. Also, by the time we got our goodies, they were of course useless due to being a level 1-3ish quality item.

Now, by my account I feel I got poked in the butt as my gameplay experience never even began to make up for the money I had thus far invested in the game. I canceled before I was billed for a month.

Flash forward to 2009! DDO is going free to play! Thats right, soon you will be able to check'er out in all her glory. My thoughts?! Well, thanks for asking! I'm thinking maybe now I can finnaly get my moneys worth and enjoy what I never had time to in the day. Also, this way i can finnaly run more than a single character in DDO, because this game was sure as hell never worth paying for more than one account.

But hey, maybe I'm comming off with the vibe of "why the fuck would you even suggest this game?!?!"

Good Question!

DDO is a good game, if you really played D&D(or turn out to be partial to the playstyle) than you may find it can be quite enjoyable. The reasons I found it pointless in the begining were largely due to extremely limited initial content , like a level cap of 10 and only a few dozen quests even available at the time! While levels in this type of game are much more meaningfull than in any other mmo I've yet played it was still a rather paltry release content for the day & age it came out. Though for "free" those things are very much worth playing through and enjoying.

My only question remaining is thus, Turbine intends to lock much of the content. They have so far claimed that "froob" players will be able to reach max level but not a whole lot more than that. Will they lock content that was part of the original release? I've read that the Warforged race will be locked, which answers that as a yes since that was one of the key races available as a selling point of the game(though wasnt available exactly at release.)

Ether way, anyone who ever played D&D should give DDO a try once its free, you might even find it worth sinking a couple bucks into for some extras.

So...where the are you CA?

The (now changed from "daily") updates thread on the Empire:TW front has been woefully silent as of late. Why? you might ask, well thats a damn fine question i say! Who knows, the Nazi's..er Mods over on the forums have been active as rabbits fucking on ecstacy but what's new there?

My narcissistic ass thinks the guy in charge of the budget has redirected key personnel on to new projects. Oh there is likely still a fair deal of work going on to Empire, however I bet dollars to dimes that some deadline has been reached and word passed up to JohnSuit about how "great the game has become since its fantastic release" and how it really "doesn't need much more work." That was sarcasm for those unable to discover such things in text btw. The assholes making that report are just trying to keep their jobs after the bunglefuck that was and still is Empire: Total War. As long as the suits don't start visiting the forums on a daily basis you assclowns in charge should be fine.

But i really don't blame you, with Sega running things you really haven't got any choice but to try and survive by covering your ass at all times and lime-lighting bullshit like the release state & current condition of the game because you were in reality unable to meet whatever asinine deadline that brother-corporate set for your team. Welcome to the corporate world.

So far Empire has ultimately been a great-hidden fiasco in the gaming world. Its really amazing how much lying, deceit, and borderline banditry has gone on with this game and ,seemingly other than the fans, none has noticed.

ultimately, fans, DO NOT BUY ANY "bonus units" for empire!!!! just download the Additional-units mod for FREE with far better, more varied, and far more interesting units than CA is trying to trick you into buying when they still have not produced the game that they promised & advertised publicly 6th months AFTER RELEASE!

Fucking Idiots

So! The handicap fellows over at CA are not only still at their hijinks but they seem to be reaching new lows in stupidity.

Navel "Enhancements"

The first thing this makes me think is "well thats nice and all but when the fuck are navel battles going to start taking place in the actual game?" Maybe my game plays different or somthing but once i squash the begining fleets, other than a couple superpowers who you really only have to beat once, Then thats it! never anymore even remotely challenging fights to be had, Ijust pick off one tiny fleet after another til game end. Btw how are those marine landings comming? still havent added the ability for the AI to attack islands except in unbelivably rare circumstances.


The second thought was, so the "counter" in the new rock-paper-scissors format for the top-end research of first of the line ships is....the lowest level ships that you've been able to build since the very first comericial port.

yeah...that makes sense in some alternate realm i guess.

how can such dumbassed cockjobs make games that rock for so long then just completly fuck it up like this? who got fired?