Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't.

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 2:01:42 AM   
Warfare1


Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: J P Falcon

This was Eric's response to that question....

quote:

ORIGINAL: J P Falcon
Eric, regarding the casuality reports....what type of battle is it that can result in one side receiving 5560 casualties and the other side 0?..I've heard of routs, but this?.....


Not 100% sure as I didn't watch that one, but... if one side was of particularly low morale/supply and was quickly routed at the start of the engagement, the casualties could have been incurred during the rout/pursuit rather than in "normal" battle. Also, forces cut off from LOS/LOC have a greater chance to surrender, which could have caused something like that.

Regards,

- Erik




It would be interesting to have a more detailed idea of how the combat system works.

Even some routing soldiers will fight back if attacked.

It's the thousands of casualties vs NO casualties that I am worried about.

Seeing 5,000 casualties vs 400 would seem to be more in line with a small routing force.

Even Napoleon, on his very best day, with the enemy on its very worst day, suffered some French casualties (even if it was because they fell on their own bayonets).

And let us not forget that before soldiers rout, they can at least get off that first round of muskets and cannon fire...

Surely, not all of the troops would rout at the same time?

Was there ever a Napoleonic battle (no matter how small) that resulted in NO casualties being suffered by one side?

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 6/26/2005 2:10:11 AM >

(in reply to Hanal)
Post #: 31
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 3:02:44 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34454
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
The game does work as you would expect Warfare. I think you are reading too much into one report excerpt in this case. I have not fought a battle where I did not sustain losses.

_____________________________


Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 32
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 4:57:08 AM   
Naomi

 

Posts: 654
Joined: 6/21/2005
From: Osaka
Status: offline
Do casualities include the number of troopers who surrender? If so, historical Napoleon did inflict casualities w/o the bloodshed of even a single man on his side on his return from Elba. (~,~)v

(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 33
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 3:12:22 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Queeg

It's a matter of taste, I guess. I think IG is a much better game than RTW. And a very good game in its own right. It has a much better campaign than RTW and I find the battles more interesting and challenging. Although there are several mods that greatly improve RTW (and a Napoleonic mod is in the works), vanilla RTW, with its screeching women, broken naval battles and generally brain-dead AI, was a big step backward in the series.


Can you "objectively explain" as to why do you consider IG to be better than RTW, if it can be explained? Please, I am not trying to be confrontational, I'd really like to hear your opinion...

Maybe there's nothing to explain, maybe that's just personal subjective opinion and I'd accept that as good answer as well

Oleg

_____________________________


(in reply to Queeg)
Post #: 34
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 6:52:20 PM   
Warfare1


Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

The game does work as you would expect Warfare. I think you are reading too much into one report excerpt in this case. I have not fought a battle where I did not sustain losses.


That's good to hear Erik.

The game looks so darn good that I thought it best to raise the issue to see if anything needed adjusting.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 35
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 8:13:51 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

The only battles where there are zero casualties on one side and (perhaps many) casualties on the other are battles in which one side attempts to flee at the outset of the battle: in this case the reported loss is from pursuit which may consist entirely of attritional losses.


(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 36
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/26/2005 8:46:36 PM   
TheHellPatrol


Posts: 1588
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Can you "objectively explain" as to why do you consider IG to be better than RTW, if it can be explained? Please, I am not trying to be confrontational, I'd really like to hear your opinion...

Maybe there's nothing to explain, maybe that's just personal subjective opinion and I'd accept that as good answer as well

Oleg
...
I'll post some of my "objective explanations" just to round things out:
Imperial Glory... The campaign is a game in itself with a slow, deliberate beginning full of diplomacy and the machinations of the era. The battles grow in intensity as the game progresses and are done in environments that are jaw droppingly beautiful. You can actually use buildings, ie:enter/fortify, which adds a new dimension to IG. The Nations' units use their native tongue so...if the uniform is missing a button the audio may distract you from noticing. The gameplay is fun, pure unadulterated fun, and i enjoy the endless tactics i can employ to attain my goal...whether in the strategic or tactical mode.

On a personal, subjective note: The time period is FAR more interesting to me than RGW, in which i find myself clicking end turn without a second thought. Medievil Total War is far better than RGW IMO, but not as "fun" as Imperial Glory.


_____________________________

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau


(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 37
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/27/2005 12:56:07 AM   
Queeg


Posts: 495
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Can you "objectively explain" as to why do you consider IG to be better than RTW, if it can be explained? Please, I am not trying to be confrontational, I'd really like to hear your opinion...

Maybe there's nothing to explain, maybe that's just personal subjective opinion and I'd accept that as good answer as well

Oleg


Sure. Much of it is purely subjective. I enjoy horse and musket era games more than ancient era. So that's part of it.

But RTW, for all its glitter, fell short in several important areas of substance. The strategic map with tactical elements (mountain passes, river crossings, field fortifications, etc.)? Great, even brilliant, idea. Problem is the AI never used them. Sure, I could use them to beat up on the AI, which already was a push-over, but that hardly makes for a great game.

The campaign game was shallow. Diplomacy was essentially meaningless. Yes, you could enter into alliances, but the AI rarely adhered to them and, given the lackluster battlefield AI, you never needed their help anyway. And many of the "features" that were added simply to try to add some modest level of challenge to the game - revolts, Senate missions and plague - struck me as overly contrived and added more nuisance than strategy. (The silly busy-work Senate missions were especially ridiculous.) Overall, the campaign was little more than an excuse to string together a series of tactical battles; it offered nothing of substance on its own.

Which, in itself, might not have been so bad had the AI not been so weak. On the strategic map, the AI insisted on dividing its forces into multiple little armies - yet without taking advantage of terrain - so you could easily pick them off piecemeal in a series of lopsided battles (after only a few of which your general would have maybe ten stars and hence be all but invincible in most any battle). And the battlefield AI bordered on atrocious. Meet their line, hit their flanks with cavalry, they break and run. Every time. Or, in the seiges, they stand fast on their little platform in the center of town and just die under a hail of arrows. I fought a few seiges where I didn't lose a single man! The campaign fairly quickly turned into one lackluster battle after another, with precious little in the way of strategy in between.

Of course, if you grew tired of the repetitve battles, you could just buy off most of the enemy armies with bribes. Which was especially easy because the AI kept its armies scattered all over the map, just waiting for you. There's something definitely wrong with a game whose core is the tactical battlefield when players find themselves tempted to just bribe the enemy into submission.

Then there were a series of bugs and oddities. Silly units like screeching women, head hurlers and bum flashers. AI armies with nothing but warhounds. Massive enemy navies with nonsensical auto-resolve combat results. And the infamous save-game seige bug.

I recognize that some of these issues were adressed in patches. Many more were fixed or wired-around in the various excellent mods. But, the fact remains that RTW out of the box had more problems than a game of its lineage should have had. And many remain.

I've played the TW series since the day STW hit the shelves and have mostly enjoyed it. But RTW, in my view, was a step backward. I understand that most of the development effort went into the graphics, to the detriment of the campaign and AI. I can accept that if it means that the developer now can spend more time on the rest of the game for future installments. I must say, though, that their decision to bail on RTW after only a couple of patches and with serious problems remaining doesn't bode well for the future of the series. We'll see.

As for IG, it's still very early. But, out of the box, it has these advantages over RTW: the campaign is far more challenging and interesting, the AI is stronger, the land battles are more challenging and just as fun and you can fight the naval battles yourself (or auto-resolve them with results that make sense). Yes, the battles are too quick at present - but you can't give RTW the nod there because the battles were too quick there too and was one of the first things the modders struggled to fix. (I know because I was one of them.) IG still has some rough edges, but the developer still has time to fix them. (If they don't, I'll complain about them too.)

And, again, IG covers a period I prefer. So there's my take.





< Message edited by Queeg -- 6/27/2005 5:06:44 AM >

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 38
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/27/2005 11:01:03 PM   
zzxxcc

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline
Hi, I'm just passing through!

But for what an outsiders opinion is worth, Imperial Glory is the primary reason I'm visiting this site.

Now it may just be me, but I'm hoping that this game (as well as the others from this genre) will be far more than just the (topic described) anti-thesis of what Imperial Glory is supposedly to have lacked!

Now also, I admit to have more interest in belly-button lint than I do in RTW, but it seems to follow IG reviews and critics around like the proverbial bad penny. Well, for my 2 cents worth, I really hope that a dislike for Imperial Glory isn't a prerequiste or a preference for the buying of these games.

(in reply to Queeg)
Post #: 39
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/27/2005 11:10:10 PM   
max_h

 

Posts: 187
Joined: 10/18/2002
Status: offline
removed

< Message edited by max_h -- 6/28/2005 9:03:38 AM >

(in reply to TheHellPatrol)
Post #: 40
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/27/2005 11:24:36 PM   
TheHellPatrol


Posts: 1588
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: max_h

its a shame to mention CoG and IG in the same thread
It's a game...what is a game you may ask?...something that is "fun", not a recreation of history. I didn't start this topic so don't wag your finger at me.
We agree on one point herr max: IG and COG do NOT belong in the same thread...but hey...if you put peanut butter on a cheese sandwhich does it become a peanut butter sandwhich?
Crown Of Glory is a historical simulation, nobody is going to yell that it wasn't what they thought it was...nobody!
Imperial Glory is an RTS game with a Napoleonic dressing thrown on top, if you don't like it fine...i do...will it take time away from COG?, nope.


_____________________________

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau


(in reply to max_h)
Post #: 41
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/27/2005 11:50:26 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34454
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
Please let's keep this discussion as civil as possible, we don't want to see this turn into an anti-IG thread.

_____________________________


Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to TheHellPatrol)
Post #: 42
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/28/2005 12:28:39 AM   
ioticus

 

Posts: 187
Joined: 6/13/2004
Status: offline
Queeg, that was the best summary of RTW's shortcomings I've read. My hat's off to you . I'm just pissed that all the reviews of RTW were glowing when it was released and they didn't mention *any* of the things you pointed out. Apparently they were blinded into a state of moronity by all the fancy graphics I fell for it hook, line, and sinker

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 43
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/28/2005 12:47:25 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline
quote:

CoG, to me, is more like a fine red wine that has already hit its prime and will only improve with age.


Lol Erik that statement sounds a lot like patches are a high probability. lol

Let's just hope the AI in COG will live up to the test of the grogs. ;) Cause as bad as I want EIA's which is taking you guys forever to release, I'm thinking about getting COG since it's not 60 GD dollars. lol I saw it at NWS for $44.99 or around that figure, fair price for a retail game just released. ;)

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 44
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/28/2005 5:16:36 AM   
Queeg


Posts: 495
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline
IG and COG look to me to be very different animals and I don't think a preference or distaste for one will have much bearing on the other. I enjoy IG very much. But for very different reasons than I suspect I'll like COG.

I'm having great fun with IG. But I'm also looking forward to June 30.

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 45
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/29/2005 2:07:13 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline
quote:

I'm having great fun with IG. But I'm also looking forward to June 30.


Me too Queeg. ;) Is this game PBEMable? Also how many MB's of a download is it, I'll probably have to wait on the boxed/cd version since I only have dialup. But, NWS is pretty good about getting the games out fast so I shouldn't have to wait too long for it to arrive.

(in reply to Queeg)
Post #: 46
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/29/2005 2:14:22 AM   
bluemonday

 

Posts: 233
Joined: 6/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Is this game PBEMable? Also how many MB's of a download is it

From info in other threads, the game is PBEM-able and will be about a 400MB download.

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 47
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/29/2005 6:25:15 AM   
Uncle_Joe


Posts: 1985
Joined: 8/26/2004
Status: offline
Yeah, I enjoyed IG a lot more than I expected I would have. Its really very light entertainment roughly centered on the Napoleonic period. But its historical accuracy is near nil. I liken it to Imperialism 2 which I still play to this day...a fun strategy game with a rough historical background.

I came to enjoy the tactical battles and even the naval battles when kept to a size of 4 or less on my side....any bigger and I just auto-calc'ed it. Obviously there are plenty of improvements that could be made to make the game better, but even 'out of the box', I enjoyed it quite a bit and spent one too many nights saying 'one more turn!' until way too late...If they ever patch it to include even just the most rudimentary of the suggestions being posted by the majority of the player, it could remain on my HD for quite some time for exactly what it is...a fun diversion in the form of a strategy game with fantastic graphics and flavor.

Thats my $.02 on it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Queeg)
Post #: 48
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/29/2005 9:43:05 AM   
Queeg


Posts: 495
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Uncle_Joe

Yeah, I enjoyed IG a lot more than I expected I would have. Its really very light entertainment roughly centered on the Napoleonic period. But its historical accuracy is near nil. I liken it to Imperialism 2 which I still play to this day...a fun strategy game with a rough historical background.

I came to enjoy the tactical battles and even the naval battles when kept to a size of 4 or less on my side....any bigger and I just auto-calc'ed it. Obviously there are plenty of improvements that could be made to make the game better, but even 'out of the box', I enjoyed it quite a bit and spent one too many nights saying 'one more turn!' until way too late...If they ever patch it to include even just the most rudimentary of the suggestions being posted by the majority of the player, it could remain on my HD for quite some time for exactly what it is...a fun diversion in the form of a strategy game with fantastic graphics and flavor.

Thats my $.02 on it.


You nailed it, Uncle Joe. Excellent description of what's fun about IG. Even the comparison to Imperialism II (which I also still play) is apt.

Actually, I'm probably looking forward to COG more than I otherwise might because of my enjoyment of IG. IG is a light, fun, great-looking game. But it has given me an appetite for something more substantial - hence my interest in COG. I view the games as complimentary, not mutually exclusive.

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 49
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/29/2005 9:52:36 AM   
TheHellPatrol


Posts: 1588
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Queeg

You nailed it, Uncle Joe. Excellent description of what's fun about IG. Even the comparison to Imperialism II (which I also still play) is apt.

Actually, I'm probably looking forward to COG more than I otherwise might because of my enjoyment of IG. IG is a light, fun, great-looking game. But it has given me an appetite for something more substantial - hence my interest in COG. I view the games as complimentary, not mutually exclusive.
Bravo, IG is an appetizer for the 7-course meal...COG IG: very tasty and looks great on the fancy plate but... not very filling


_____________________________

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau


(in reply to Queeg)
Post #: 50
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/30/2005 5:49:03 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline
So COG "tastes great" and IG is "less filling" is that it? ;)

(in reply to TheHellPatrol)
Post #: 51
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 6/30/2005 11:40:30 PM   
Queeg


Posts: 495
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

So COG "tastes great" and IG is "less filling" is that it? ;)


That's fair.

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 52
RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. - 7/1/2005 12:08:06 AM   
Rowly


Posts: 14
Joined: 6/6/2005
Status: offline
Wow,
never thought I'd provoke such a response!
Anyhow, I was not slagging IG off and somewhere along the line the purpose of my thread went off tangent. The problem with IG is the lack of any AI in your units. Forgotten cavalry will stand around getting butchered rather than withdrawing from their completed target. This is the advantage of IGYG type games. (IMHO of course)

A game I really enjoyed playing was called Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord (CMBO) This was a first person/third person tactical 3d wargame. It was great fun. Fancy the graphics of IG with the depth of a game like this. With CMBO you got a feeling of control but it had features like fog of war, LOS, terrain effects and so on......

Bring on Combat Mission Beyond Iberia

(in reply to Warfare1)
Post #: 53
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: Will this be the game Imperial Glory isn't. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.203