Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.


I will suggest Empire 2 because I love the original

Nieko50Nieko50 Posts: 1Registered Users
I would just like to say I really want a Empire 2 and I think a lot of others would love to see it as well. I know its an old topic but it was fun to play that game and I want to see another some day. I'm just curious if there's even any thought of making an Empire 2 or something like it.


  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKPosts: 36,558Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    Moved from the Warhammer forums ro TW General Chat.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • GeneralstonewallGeneralstonewall Posts: 6Registered Users
    This is what I’d like to see in a Empire 2 total war game. First off time period and tech. I’d like it to start at pre American revolution like it did in the first game. So it extend into the time of American revolution than to the Napoleonic Wars and than it’ll end right after the American civil war. That’s the time frame I’d like to see and how the technology would progress. Say navy wise at the start of a campaign you got rate of the line sail ships. As time and your tech tree progress. You can eventually work your way up to civil war era ironclad warships. Or obviously early units start with flintlock muskets but again as time and tech progresses you move up to concussion cap muskets and rifles. And than at the end of the tech tree you could get breach loaded sharps rifles and repeating Henry rifles. Another thing I’d like to see in this game is to be able to lead vastly larger armies like you can in Rome 2 and Attila. Also I want sea to land invasions! Launch your troops from your fleet of warships where they go on land using row boats. Also coastal sea fort sieges. Where you can do a combined land and sea assault on the fort. Having your land army assault it land side and also have your navy bombard it. At the same time launch an amphibious assault. I’d keep it at the same theaters of war as the first Empire total war. Same nation as the first. Just add the union army and the confederate army if you progress through an American campaign. Also I’d want artillery to have the Napoleon total war edge.
  • Yashar_irYashar_ir Posts: 1Registered Users
    edited December 2018
    I believe Empire Total War was one of a kind. The best thing in the game in my idea is the map. It has the whole earth minus the east Asia. This is why I love the game. There are so many factions. From Europeans to middle east Asia and even India, even some native factions of north America. If there is a chance for a new version of the game, it would be even better if we could play Persia (Iran). As the matter of fact, playing as an american leader could be new experience, too. In the Empire Total war after a while, america shows up and at first we were enemies :neutral: which it has a history behind. (it happens when you are the great Britain). But I want to be america, fighting those indigenous people.
    A new ETW surely will have a great graphics, new engine and even redesigning the factions. It all just makes me more thirsty for it.
  • BalaminienGSBalaminienGS Posts: 20Registered Users
    My current feelings on anything total war and anything beyond pike and shot is that it would be best to have the campaign function in real time. This was especially the feeling I got when I was playing Napoleon Total War and had Napoleon's campaigns being read in the background on YouTube. The thought followed with me in my most recent play through of Empire Total War even when the battles and wars where far less sophisticated.

    You, the commanding Brain, have 3 army generals, with 30 units of the line, 9 units of 12lb iron cast cannons, 12 units of cavalry, 5 units of militia and 4 units of skirmishers and plan to invade Saxony, which could put you at war with several other nations. The city of Dresden is the aim and what are you going to do? Total War style march a force and occupy it? No! Your forces are going to take real time to march to the location/city and taking the city isn't the end of the war. It'll knock Saxony out, but the other nations will still contest the final result. March your army straight at the city and what happens if the nations at war aim to flank you? Not on the battlefield, but on the actual campaign map?! You take Dresden, the capitols occupied but the armies don't just disappear and being a defensive war funds for pay for the defending army protecting their independence is waived, the upkeep for supplies and be maintain for a short enough period by a leading memeber of the alliance to fight!

    So with three armies sitting around Dresden the enemy has marched right along the east through Bautzen or in the west through Chemnitz - maybe both! This wouldn't be a "HA I'll just spend my turn marching these two 20 stack forces against each army, one battle after another on my turn - done" - You would have a campaign map where armies maneuvered in real time to threaten long term and short term ends. March that one army towards the Chemnitz and the other towards Bautzen and wouldn't you know it. Those armies don't want to meet you - they are marching away - do you just keep marching them at each army, knowing that a prolonged war as Prussia without a decisive victory now will leave you with enemy armies stacking against you? So you think keep the chase up, but where are those armies now leading your armies? Oh those two armies are marching farther away from your CENTER in Dresden, welcome to flank management on the campaign map where a coarse of action isn't neatly compiled within a turn - let's jaunt back to the beginning and see why real time and progressing through the centuries begin with the 18th century is important.


    Spy shows that Saxony's forces are mobilizing - not completely though - spys show that Austria is mobilizing - because units need to be recruited, outfitted and trained - You are a total war fan, if enemy armies are "building up" and Austria is allied with France and Russia, who do you think they are planning on attacking? ... Luckily your forces are almost always mobilized thanks to your trait as a Prussian Nation. Lets take the initiative, our strength is going to rest in denying these 3 nations the chance meet up some place quaint to talk out Prussian destruction over tea the next year.

    Three armies organized to operate in unison but separately will allow an initial push to be secured. Dresden will be the location selected because Altstadt is quite the rich city center and if the capitol is taken and properly secured would cripple any plans of the Saxon or Austrian Armies given the river crossing's denied. Your armies could march towards Bautzen, Dresden and Chemnitz because the infrastructure of Saxony towards the Bohemian (Austrian) border runs as a neat interconnected line; Lower Saxony would successfully be isolated.

    In real time 3 armies are going to march towards their objectives, they will be marching by column when it is set to marching mode. Each section of land will technically be represented by a strategic terrain view that is already offered in Total War, but is a rolling view centered on where the army is in relation to the lands layout (more on that later) - you are able to set a formation for traveling with each army - the strategic terrain view provided on the main campaign map will have the units appear as when in the strategic view itself like in a battle, but when in marching mode will lock placement adjacent to the road. Setting cavalry units at the front of a column when the army is in column marching mode or placing skirmishers on the flanks, all will have significance on the march (I'll assume you'll know why, but I'll touch on this later)

    Scouts can be sent ahead of the main marching column that can reveal the roads further ahead and basic information on passing towns. Spies don't reveal whole sections of map as they have in the past ( I'll go into about the spies later) only immediate information that's contextual. Your spy in this scenario has made a career in the Saxon army itself, is a junior officer and their ancillary includes forged documents to hide Prussian heritage and loyalty. You are not only lucky that he is operating within the enemies army, but that this armies main leader in the area is Friedrich Augustus (Count Rutowsky), Commander-in-chief of the Saxon Army. It is being revealed to you that the enemy plans to combine with Saxony's and that is their main alliance goal, which if achieved would lead to a morale boast (more on that later) as it will be a successful alliance plan. Plus this has revealed that the Saxony army isn't just mobilizing, it's mobilizing east of Dresden near the fortifications of Pirna, which means that the plan you had to go by Cottbus with each army will have to change. The Forests of Lusatia would leave the armies too congested (slowed with a prolonged line of troops) east of the river and any crossing that'd need to be secured. Perhaps shifting all forces to the west on their approach to the objectives?

    Let's see three generals be chosen. The pool of candidates for a Monarchy like Frederick's can include members of hereditary titles except their deaths can possibly lead to casi-belli's, it can include eligible non-aristocratic member's whose experience and talent will reflect army tradition/research or it can be Member's of the royal family, though the dangers there should be the most obvious. Decisions like this will effect the internal politics of the domain as non-aristocratic members may have less reasons to be loyal if enlightenment isn't properly handled later on and they become overly popular *cough* Napoleon *cough* ...

    How about

    Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick
    He has the trait "raised in military matters'' so if you (the player) were committed elsewhere in this real time strategy you can expect him to know things ( for the campaign map) like using terrain to an advantage, not committing to battle if only at a disadvantage, not maneuvering on the campaign map to be caught against rivers, mountains or operating separately from the main body. "Seasoned Infantry Veteran" means that he isn't just theory, the sort of forces he operated in not only gives him affinity towards those forces (for personal morale), but forces will have affinity towards him and any actual regiment that he operated in (more on that later) has heightened stats under his command "I.Leibgarde". He has a personality though as well, tenacious and aggressive, so expect that to risk him in a charge provides a passive bonus for troops around him and that if he was to charge that the mass density of units grouped with him in an attacking state increases (meaning more likely to penetrate a line) due to history (and without worrying about using an "ability" button). On the down side constant withdraws or retreats (even foreigned) while leading an army may have him lose individual morale - which individual moral as a cpu operated general will effect how they prepare or handle a coming engagement (why be aggressive if my commander's (the player's) behavior is to always kite and retreat even with even forces, ALWAYS? I expect that we will just retreat and so I should have my line set up with extra reserves to help preserve the forces when it's required retreat). "35 years of age" ordering him off a horse and to go run somewhere isn't going to kill this man and his martial stats (individually) will be near a personal peak. "Aristocratic" You know where his loyalties reside and his outlook on politics. Order by Traditional Values may come at odds with what keeps a populace happy or the most educated.

    Then how about

    August Wilhelm, Duke of Braunschweig-Bevern

    "Raised in military matters", "Raised in matters of state" which would mean as a governor of a state or province regiments recruited in his areas would not only be provided individual unit bonuses and/or be recruited more efficiently, but any political costs would be decreased and population sqalor maintained "Seasoned Infantry Veteran", "Braunschweig-Bevern Infantry", "Scars-body-Fully Recovered" As what will be explained later, a Military man with experience that may have been wounded will be wounded somewhere and the details will matter. Being maimed may be an option, which while naturally means a negative physically may not mean the same mentally. A "maimed" general might be "psychologically scarred" which opens the way towards traits like "drunkard", " nihilistic", "without remorse"or even "With a Death Wish", but at the same time a "maimed" general may grow despite the fact to "Strong Willed", "self-assured", "Motivator" or "Empathetic" which would carry their weight individually and for the governing army. Being wounded may itself bare resemblance to the previous list of traits, so that having a general who was wounded or maimed in the past may have a negative or positive path in development partially based on personality. Here August Wilhelm's scar's have recovered and it has lead to no negative nor positive outcome. "40 years of age" Individual martial stats may begin to deflate from this point, including stamina on his feet. "Aristocratic"

    And finally

    Frederick II, King of Prussia
    "Raised in military matters" As a leader provides reduce costs of armies, "Raised in matters of the state" As a Leader decreases political costs, "Cultured" decreased penalties of occupying regions with separate cultures, "Strong-Willed" attempting to run away from a father who openly disavows you and ending up in a prison for it can do a lot to a person, but then seeing your friend on a change of heart be beheaded and that you yourself are next up to the plate can do even more, yet ... by the grace of god (more accurately a chaplain) the King to be was spared ... AND then worked on the duties provided after so conscientiously he changed his fathers disposition while still continuing to indulge in what he personally wanted to learn and explore. A greater war score may have to be acquired against a leader with this trait and their forces mobilize faster. A statesman political cost is reduced and as a governor building projects receive a bonus as well. A general with this trait has armies operate more quickly in all respects. "Philosopher" correspondence with Voltaire will do that and writing a book titled "Anti-Macchiavel" can sure as hell cement it. First any character with this trait will see a corresponding "Philosophy" contextually based on occupation, the highest rank provides context which in this case is as a leader is for Frederick II "Enlightened Absolutism". A leader with this trait reduces constraints on centers of learning and reduces the penalty of being a monarchy with advancements of enlightenment.

    Now, let's talk about the structuring of an army. Imagine the political view of Rome 2, except with a tab that reads armies and in that tab you see something similar to a family tree ... except that it's for creating army structures. At the beginning of the game you can go ahead and create as many armies as you can afford, but based on military research and theory, how effective or efficient that army or stacks of armies will be won't be that much. You have the money and the manpower (populations of city centers made into a fraction to correspond to the desired balance of play) and can order the recruitment of 20 army stacks from the beginning of the game as like .. Russia! Well let's talk about how research in a game in a period like this should function, especially if in real time.

    Take industry as an example and I think some common denominators prevent themselves for any particular research topic. Having an invention discovered and having that invention spread and having that invention saturate are three different but key elements irregardless of military, philosophy or Industry. Each topic may produce different effects between sub elements that distinguish each topic, but ... well let's say industry. Advancements should progressively make things cheaper and more efficient when it's elements are practiced at a larger scale, but a cost/benefit analysis is a straightforward mechanic to represent the hesitation or deflated nature of some inventions and their integration. There will be an invention, like the steam pump, but that it would lead to some building being available for upgrade is a boring mechanic, child's play really. It's simpler than looking for a mechanic to govern the development of automatic upgrades ... but maybe the past of Total War has revealed it already. A destroyed or wrecked city over time does rebuild, so why not have upgrades for regions and cities use a similar mechanic - the same in fact, but for working towards the next upgrade.

    - Steam energy may have a recorded date of sometime in 1st century AD, but the pump/engine is "discovered" with a Thomas Newcomen, but the spread of that knowledge may be of a just as great of importance as the discovery (if obviously a bit less). Thomas Newcomen hasn't discovered this apparently before 1712, but he could have had the idea before hand, pieces of a puzzle needing to fall together, or at least be within an environment where the pieces have an opportunity to be synced - but that's even before the test whether man made or organic, either or, still observed. Is it layered ... Problems with floods, in a town with coal mining and the guy has a background as an ironmonger. All the pieces of a puzzle laying there, the problem made the solution sought. Generalize the specialization - Environment, Observation, solution - no, enhancement - no - addition! - no even more general - change. So in Empire Total war different towns could specialize in different areas as a reflection of that town's environment ... no ... as a reflection of observations of the environment, 'iron" here, "river" here, so an observation leads to a change "settling there" of environment, but then as well as the observation in a relation to the environment changing, the observation on change, changes the environment of observation - I've become lost in circular logic, but the three elements are not alone nor isolated, so what other acting elements are their and how would their existence contribute to cause and effect. Okay, so to know that generally things can specialize and specializing tends to attribute to generalizing in the aim of connecting value from separate observations to provide for the most logical general consensus ... Specialize - General - Environment - Observe - Change . Specialize the general - environment, observation and change aren't separate but maybe could even be further generalized into one force in itself

    (environment = observation = change) = (Specialization = Generalization) ... What does it mean for Physics to specialize, if the notion of specializing is human observation of an environment which is a change to all three. Specialize = Generalize, General Relativity would be oxymoron if not for observations made in a physics environment that lead to changes in the very fields that ... Relativity is specialized generalization and General is specialized the it's relation to relativity!

    The steam pump came to be because specialized environment, observation and change = general environments, observations and changes. That's why I had the "industry leading to philosophy" moment, because the three both exist simultaneously. If Thomas Newcomen hadn't discovered the steam engine in 1712 in a parallel universe it wouldn't matter, because it'd be an observation from an environment that changed because of it. Which thank the lord brings me back to game mechanics

    Replayability would dependent on general fun and connections that are drawn to perceived specialization, common stories are best when they are of two different things and the unexpected connection. Tech is how an Empire 2 could take a crap of paradox from a historical perspective in tackling tech (putting Stellaris to the side)! You the player wouldn't have some educated man sit on his butt for 12 years to piece together a steam pump. You the player have characters that are the parts of the puzzle. You get a character or an invention/discovery by playing with each as a piece - you get an eccentric mathematician, don't put him in a college with Issac Newton, Issac Newton at that college and his inventions and insights are defined as much by his own personality as it is him being a civilian. The man is old, and when you try to attach him to an army of coarse he rejects. No, this character shows up at the college inspired by Issac Newton and you the player see nothing about a percentage for a discovery for this or that or some random increase in this or that field. You have a character Roger Whiston who is personally eccentric, a mathematician and has a pet cat, you want to see a break through with military equipment, so what do you do? Attach him to the army - This Roger is young and let's add another contextual trait, "Easily impressed" . Math + Military may = breakthrough so requesting he join the army as an observer leads to no one's surprise, him accepting "the KING wants ME to be a military observe and be PAID for it, but of coarse". Now it's a mathematician + army + context that is going to decide if something is discovered. Something is! Training a standing army may lead to helping the army with it's supplies, oh well - not the discovery you wanted - *flash forward a decade* You need to change who's leading an army, the old fart died, a traditional aristocrat raised in military matters is gone and you notice a younger option for a general "Educated in military matters" "All theory" "Diligent" - Okay so he has the basics of warfare down, best for him to either lead a force that's not as the operating commander of a campaign, but he is diligent and that theory can be made into a practice over a long military career! *A couple months later* You forgot that you had that mathematician still in that army didn't you? That's fine, guess what, that young general took the supply efficiency of that one army and has created a manual for it to be standardized through the whole military! You might have been too busy trying to see if you could make a break through by having a capitalist as a Ministry of Defense paired with a governor who was raised on the affairs of state and military matters, but nothing's come on it yet. Wait, an event in a territory with low industry, but a high lower income population is centered around a local aristocrat selling re-estate to make up for debt - maybe you get an event where your capitalistic defense ministry recommends a war to increase demand in goods to help nudge that territory into developing military industry over commercial development, or maybe he has spoken to that aristocrat and there is an offer for a manor in the country side to be redesigned as a military academy. It might not be better or improved weapons, but it could ... ugh ... It's been 8 hours


    Other nonsense

    My decision? A player's decision? Order the cavalry to meet up with the encampment, the guns do not fire because they - rendered at the possible battle field are set to fire at will off. Now from the grand campaign, you are being shown an exclamation mark that allows for a place to zoom from the campaign onto the rendered battlefield. Only the places of a possible catalyst enables a fully rendered field, all other places maintain strategic terrain view rendering upon a click. Movement of units onto the a rendered battled field could look like shogun total war 1 units as they arrive. Rendering landscape for battles are human centeric - implications of terrain can always remain state based between two ai forces.

    Now that Cav ins't in the line of sight the main enemy army, the enemy hasn't looked at the option to use a spy, it thought has chosen to scout ahead, meaning limited percentages in seeing/making out locations and troops outside the scope of just the main road, leading it to believe the army isn't present there. It does know our army is is just outside of the city. From the main campaign map, click the cav and click the location of the guns/encampment - it'll take 5 minutes by standard speed and 3 minutes if Galloping (effects on stamina). Order my infantry 9 units of infantry to march, it'll take 10 minutes by standard march - 5 minutes to be moving out from encampment (disorganized)

    How to make this scenario work when time on the grand campaign and within a battle always differ? Fractional rationalizing - make the lowest denominator a minute passing on the campaign - make the baseline length of the in game minute equaled to the fraction of time it takes for a typical standard turn to pass (whatever the company standards are for those, reflected on system requirements that are given out) and place values of how much allotted time should be aimed for with a given battle vs all the other decision making AI will generally be making - all centered around a whole unit (the time taken for a typical cycle of a classic turn). Base army movement speed around this as well.

    A slow game-play speed of a real time strategy provides more area's of thought processing that can tie a potential player down allowing for AI to make moves with a even greater window of processing. The player here may hit speed up, watching the enemy army/formation at a march a) move into the perfect spot for the guns to fire b) the place in TIME for the guns to fire with support along the way. IF they are passing time at the battlefield level then that is a fraction of a minute - of 60 seconds at minimum without a pause and 20 seconds at max which would be on the campaign map still a factor of 20x the time of baseline to enable AI to workout the decisions of it's nations. The ai now is enabled a possible breathing room to make decisions and moves that allows for more calculated decisions.

    Me - I wait 7 minutes as the army passes, I picked these lightly forested hills by the road across a grassland for a reason. Firing at the armies mass when it's front units (including dragoons and regiments of horse) are close to the approximate max distance of ... 6lb cast iron cannons, the cannons effective range would be 1000m plus shedding a couple hundred meters for error and not including distance afforded by height above sea level (which, as an aside would also mean that armies could possible suffer attrition on the grand campaign as they marched past forts with cannons). Effectively landing and killing troops, maybe not, but harassment may be noted. Their cavalry at a gallop, maybe 11 miles per hour ( Regulations for the Instructions, Formations, and Movements of the Cavalry circa 1851) - 1000m estimation is .62 miles - enemy cavalry then is travelling .183(repeating) miles a minute means they'll be arriving within roughly 3 minutes - less then 3 if they begin the charge early - less then 2 minutes if a charge, but it would be disorganized as each individual horse and their difference in capacity is given a greater distance to become evident.

  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Posts: 1,238Registered Users
    Problem there is you will lose a lot of the campaign elements. It's why there's so few games that do it. Look at the visual depth of Pdox games, that's what you end up with. It's hard for the system to handle all those details without one of the few super computers governments own.
Sign In or Register to comment.