Total War Games: Empire and Napoleon

[solops]

What is the story on these two? I recall reading that one was the best Total war game and the other was the worst. Help?

[Jarhead0331]

What is the story on these two? I recall reading that one was the best Total war game and the other was the worst. Help?

They are both awesome, although that won't stop some people from whining and moaning about one thing or another. Generally, I think most would take the position that Napoleon is the more polished of the two.

[undercovergeek]

but with a much smaller scope

[Tuna]

Love them both as well!.. Seems like a lot of people do not like these versions, but I have had spent many hours of fun playing both of them!

[Swatter]

I liked Empire the most, but I didn't find it worth playing without DarthMod.

[Cyrano]

I'm one of JH's moaners...wait...never mind.

Suffice it to say that in every aspect of Napoleonic warfare that I find relevant, N:TW fails and that rather badly.

Troop scale, ground scale, terrain scale, weapon effectiveness (particularly relative one to another), troop formations, and even some of the purposes to which different troop types were put are all poorly done...and that leaves the rubbish of the naval game to the side.   It's an ancients system that was never intended for the black powder era and it shows at every turn. 

I also, and this is a personal grievance I'll warrant, could never get either E:TW or N:TW working properly on my home rig even though I can easily run Rome II at all the highest settings with no problem whatsoever.

Strangely, perhaps because I care much less about the Lace Wars era, I wasn't driven half so mad by the experience of E:TW and even managed to finish an entire Grand Campaign.

At the least, there's absolutely no need to pay anything approaching Steam retail for either game as they go on sale for less than $10 fairly frequently.  If you're not looking for anything approaching historical verisimilitude, there's a lot of game there for that price.  I think of both games as the gaming equivalent of pixie sticks.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[Sir Slash]

I'll second what Swatter said. Darthmod is a big plus for both games and I liked ETW better than NTW. The hits on Empire relate to the game being very broken at release. I thought Shogun 2 was a bit better than both the aforementioned but it's close. Empire's world map is probably the largest of any TW game. Napoleon's combat maybe better than Empire.

[Gusington]

I liked Empire and Napoleon the least in the series...it's been so long since I played either I can't even recall why.

[Jarhead0331]

I'm one of JH's moaners...wait...never mind.

Suffice it to say that in every aspect of Napoleonic warfare that I find relevant, N:TW fails and that rather badly.

Troop scale, ground scale, terrain scale, weapon effectiveness (particularly relative one to another), troop formations, and even some of the purposes to which different troop types were put are all poorly done...and that leaves the rubbish of the naval game to the side.   It's an ancients system that was never intended for the black powder era and it shows at every turn. 

I also, and this is a personal grievance I'll warrant, could never get either E:TW or N:TW working properly on my home rig even though I can easily run Rome II at all the highest settings with no problem whatsoever.

Strangely, perhaps because I care much less about the Lace Wars era, I wasn't driven half so mad by the experience of E:TW and even managed to finish an entire Grand Campaign.

At the least, there's absolutely no need to pay anything approaching Steam retail for either game as they go on sale for less than $10 fairly frequently.  If you're not looking for anything approaching historical verisimilitude, there's a lot of game there for that price.  I think of both games as the gaming equivalent of pixie sticks.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

See, but this critique is not fair in my opinion. The game was never meant to be an ultra realistic simulation of 18th and 19th century warfare. If that is what you are looking for, then yes, might was well not bother...but I don't think it is right to knock a game for being what it is not, and what it was never meant or advertised to be.

its one thing to say it is simply not your cup of tea and then pass on it, but its another thing completely to attack the game and urge someone to avoid paying retail for it because it is not what you wanted or hoped it would be. Quite frankly, I've certainly received my money's worth, and then some. And to say its the "gaming equivalent of pixie sticks"? Come on...that is just gratuitously inaccurate and offensive to those who enjoy it.

[Cyrano]

I think the critique is fair, but I do not dispute for a moment that there's a whole lot of "courses for horses" where the critic is obligated to explain why a game like this hacks him off.  In fact, last time I slagged N:TW hereabouts one of our forum colleagues contacted me off-line and asked, in effect, "dude, why so angry?"

I did want more from these games because I wanted them to be at least different if not better than they turned out to be.  Others here and elsewhere have judged N:TW and E:TW within the confines of the TW series which, of course, comes with its own set of assumptions, and found them wanting.  For me -- although I've played every one of the damn things from Shogun forward -- that really wasn't ever an option.  Maybe, because of my love of the era, I couldn't bear the system's cheats and abstractions anymore.  They were always there, but it was all so damn pretty.  Maybe, on the contrary, I'm just a fun-killing, aging git.  I note in passing  that these are not mutually exclusive.    Whatever the case, I can't bear the thing for reasons aforesaid.

That others have enjoyed it and some immensely is unquestionable and perhaps I even envy them a bit.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

 

[Martok]

I hated Empire for its strategic AI, which badly suffered from the "Black Knight syndrome" even worse than most TW titles (and was never really fixed from what I saw). 

[mikeck]

I like them both...Empire is more for me because of the time period and scope. In the end...its total war, not Histwar. It's like complaining about Panzer general because it's nort War in the East

[airboy]

I just bought Empire Total War last weekend for $5 on the Steam sale.  It had overall good reviews both by users and by critics.

[W8taminute]

Both are good games in my humble opinion with Napoleon being slightly more polished than Empire.  These games are not to be taken seriously and if you just play them to have fun they're both good.  I prefer Empire simply because the map covers pretty much most of the civilized world at the time. 

[JasonPratt]

To be fair, you can't tell how seriously not to take the games from their marketing campaigns.  ::)

From the stated intentions of the publishers they were meant to be taken seriously as strategic games for the period, and as tactical games for the period. If we have to plant our tongues firmly in cheek to enjoy playing them, they still failed to meet the expectations generated by Creative Assembly marketing -- in that broad sense. (They also failed to provide a particularly stable game for Empire on release, and for a long time afterward.)

As gorgeous games which feature a lot of somewhat-relevant strategic/cultural management and tactical action, I think they undoubtedly succeed, assuming you can get them to run stably.  ;) There have been many competitors but the Total War series is still, very deservedly, the champion for this kind of game, despite its frequent warts and aberrant mutations.