PDA

View Full Version : THE main question on Imperial Glory to Pyrostudios and/or Eidos Interactive



EmperorLoef
18th Jun 2004, 07:11
Hi there,

I've got a very important main question: What is the maximum of units one can expect during battle?

In other Napoleonic games like cossacks2 they have a more then 10.000 soldiers/units per scenario, how is it with that in Imperial Glory?

The greater/bigger the maximum units the more better/game fun.

sick
19th Jun 2004, 21:41
I can't answer your question, neither I can agree with this:

Originally posted by EmperorLoef
The greater/bigger the maximum units the more better/game fun.
I do have to agree that a game without a good fight is not a game with a high fun factor.
Building up a strong army and fighting the enemy was the most important, actually the only, factor in Praetorians. Imperial Glory will be focussed more on politics, trade, diplomacy, resource management and technology research, ofcourse not to forget battles.
The E3 2004 trailer gives a good idea of how many units there are in Imperial Glory.
See my signature for a link to the trailer.

Vic Flange
22nd Jun 2004, 15:02
We haven't gone for 'enormous' battles in this game, rather around 2,000 units simultaneously on-screen. The approach we're taking is to simulate more realistic battles, with great graphical variety between units; a large animation set; detailed, interactive maps and a fairly complex AI system. Basically, we wanted to avoid rows of near identical looking 'toy soldiers' all behaving in more or less the same way.

So, with these factors in mind, along with system spec and control/interface considerations, this is the number we've arrived at.

sick
23rd Jun 2004, 14:52
Originally posted by Vic Flange
Basically, we wanted to avoid rows of near identical looking 'toy soldiers' all behaving in more or less the same way.


So you are indirectly refering to Rome: Total War.
Rome: Total War looks very cool, but in trailers you can see that all the soldiers move on the same way at the same time, all the time.
The only thing I just love is when soldiers get trampled by elephants and horses, then you see them flying high.:D

I think most people have way to high expectations of Rome: Total War. I won't buy the game before trying the demo, I'm unsure if this game really will be such a big succes as everyone says...




Here is an interesting part from the E3 2004 preview of GameSpy:

The first thing the Pyro demonstrator did was give order to garrison the building. To my amazement, the beautifully animated individual soldiers did so - not by disappearing and changing the building art, but by actually running into the structure and taking up defensive positions! Every single unit on the field was individually animated, some crouching behind fallen pillars, other taking up positions on the roof.

Mike_B
23rd Jun 2004, 15:26
Must say that I'm not really a Total war fan. I haven't played the series but I don't like the looks of it. People (read (p)reviewers) always seem to praise the 3D engine while I think it's not that impressive. I don't like that when you see a zoomed in screenshot you see blockiness. So without going further off-topic I think Pyro's engine looks far better and more detailed (gotta see the castle in the E3 trailer). Also in response (well sorta) to the first poster question: I think that just like in Praetorians, the main thing about your troops is how you use them, e.g. by terrain (and like sick just posted) buildings etc. The strategic use was very important in Praetorians and if you played it well you could kill like thousands units of your opponent while finishing the mission with like max. 18 deaths. That is in my opinion much more challenging than a 'make as many soldiers as you can and rush the enemy' scenario's/games.

Vic Flange
24th Jun 2004, 17:46
I quite enjoyed Total War but it did have its limitations. Creative Assembly have been working on Rome for some time now, so perhaps they will address some of the previous problems.

To comment on the use of buildings - this feature is starting to look really nice in the code, and most of the maps will have interactive areas (not just buildings but trees, rocks, walls, bits of debris etc) that you can use to gain a tactical advantage over your opponent.

Joker II
24th Jun 2004, 18:27
I believe every type of RTS game, wether this one or the other has it's advantage, but one thing you can't deny is the fact that if you try to make a game about these kind of wars, you need troops and quiet frankly, 2000 doesn't really do the job for me ;)

That doesn't mean of course that the game won't be any good, I'm certain you guys are working really hard on it and it will have other possitive aspects towards it then massive amounts of troops ;)

By the way @m, if this is the way you have played other RTS games in producing units and sending them straight towards the enemy then I think you haven't played it online against someone who uses tactics, I can asure you, playing Cossacks with thousands and thousands of units where you plan a strategy can be very much fun.

If this could be implemented into a game like Imperial Glory where you also get the features that I have allready read about, then boy oh boy, you guys would have a game that would ROCK BIG TIME :D

See ya,
Joker ;)

Mike_B
24th Jun 2004, 19:51
Originally posted by Joker II
By the way @m, if this is the way you have played other RTS games in producing units and sending them straight towards the enemy then I think you haven't played it online against someone who uses tactics, I can asure you, playing Cossacks with thousands and thousands of units where you plan a strategy can be very much fun.

Can't say I played Cossacks so ... What I meant was that for me it isn't necessary to have thousands of units if it can be challenging without it too. Though I'm pretty sure that this will differ from game to game. Btw never sended my units right into the enemies arms.

Joker II
24th Jun 2004, 20:03
Originally posted by @m
Btw never sended my units right into the enemies arms. [/B]

LOL, good to hear @m ;)

Do hope that alltough the amount of troops won't be massive, the gameplay and versatility will be AWESOME from Imperial Glory :)

See ya,
Joker ;)

sunsmountain
26th Jun 2004, 14:31
> Rome: Total War looks very cool, but in trailers you can see that
> all the soldiers move on the same way at the same time, all the time.

I'm not dissing Imperial Glory or anything, but this above opinion is just plain wrong.

Each 3D model out of the 120 within a unit steps and marches slightly out of sync, giving the whole a lifelike appearance.

The first 3 trailers did not have this implemented. All others after that, not to mention the Time Commander show on the BBC, did.

If there are two things that strike me about Imperial Glory, it is:

1. The campaign map has the same colors, borders and pieces as seen in Shogun: Total War.
2. Soldiers are low sprites, who move in straight lines. Units do not have models that are spaced at different intervals, all intervals are the same.

All in all I am very disappointed in Imperial Glory so far. I urge the programmers to show more originality than a tech tree, which, to be fair, just doesn't cut it.

sick
26th Jun 2004, 19:12
Originally posted by sunsmountain
The first 3 trailers did not have this implemented. All others after that, not to mention the Time Commander show on the BBC, did.
I only saw the first two or three trailers. Thanks for the information.:)

About the originality, these days it is hard to come with an original game, simply because so many ideas already have been thaught of. PyroStudios had a great influence on the strategy genre because of their Commandos series, they know what they do when making a game. We just have to wait and see.:)

Hipolit
26th Jun 2004, 20:35
Originally posted by sick

About the originality, these days it is hard to come with an original game, simply because so many ideas already have been thaught of. PyroStudios had a great influence on the strategy genre because of their Commandos series, they know what they do when making a game. We just have to wait and see.:)

Absolutely right! Commandos series changed the word strategy games!

But 2000 units is good amounth for not big operations and small military actions...But if you want to go on a fighting spree as if you were a great army leader you need something else, like cossakcs!:D :p

Best wishes

Hipolit

Vic Flange
28th Jun 2004, 11:41
Just to clarify on sunsmountain's points-

1) It's similar, but then I suppose all maps are pretty similar. In any case, we're still a while away from release and there's still work to be done
2) The units aren't sprites, but 3D models
2 cont) Soldiers can move independently; they fire and reload slightly differently; have a variety of idle anims; enter buildings and take up defensive positions individually; charge the enemy with differing animations and at slightly different speeds etc. They don't simply move in straight lines

Shan100200
16th Jul 2004, 19:23
I think some of you may know the Total War Series and the new Game Rome: Total War that would be come out on September. My question is how does the gameplay of Imperial Glory compare to Rome: Total War? What is the simularities and what is the Differences?

Arctic_Wolf
18th Jul 2004, 12:59
Originally posted by EmperorLoef
The greater/bigger the maximum units the more better/game fun.

I don't care whether I have 10 or 10,000 soldiers, if I can't control them easily and quickly without having to use hotkeys I won't be happy. Its a fact that the less control someone has over their situation the more frustrated they become. The more frustrated someone is, the less fun they are having.

Therefore I say the number of troops the game has onscreen at once does not determine how fun it is, but it is how well you can control them. If you are doing a fighting retreat(300 troops) against a superior force(1,000 troops) you may still be having fun but if you are the superior force(10,000) and are being decimated because you can't find the right key/button/menu then you are not having fun.

Vic Flange
20th Jul 2004, 11:55
Originally posted by Shan100200
My question is how does the gameplay of Imperial Glory compare to Rome: Total War?
Difficult to say without having played RTW, however we expect to have a deeper 'management' side to the game. We also have fully playable naval battles, which is the major difference in many people's eyes. These are very broad comments, but until we see more of RTW it's tough to go into specifics.

Frederick the Great
8th Aug 2004, 23:24
To the men of Pyro, I can't understand why you do not like the Total War engine. Not only is it easy to control, have above adequate graphics, and has a decent amount of men to control...its also fun.

Though gameplay is the main issue, having an army numbering at least 1,000 outmanuever and engage another thousand man army is an extremely gratifying experience. The graphics in Imperial glory, by all means, greater than those in the Total War engine, but I can't see how units in Imperial Glory numbering 100 men can make the game any less playable than an Imperial Glory with units numbering 40 men. Total War has proved that to us all (I find it very surpising that the senior members to not approve of those games).

One thing that I should STRONGLY recommend to the creators of Imperial Glory is that they should try out an excellent mod for Medieval: Total War called Napoleonic: Total War. It uses the Total War engine to simulate a flawless Napoleonic-era battle, and often I had games where I faced off my 900 Prussians against 1,500 bloodthirsty Austrians, and won, without tearing a single hair out through frustration.

I insist that you lay your hands on this gem at http://thelordz.co.uk
You will never regret doing that.

Regards

Willmore
9th Aug 2004, 01:58
Ok, who said that they hate the game ?

And you don't use other game's engine that often.

And I don't think that Total War engine allowed for the use of individual soldiers, here - you will have voltigeurs advancing in pairs, and acting more or less individually, as I understand it.

Total War was great, but it is outdated, RTW, might be an update, but it hasn't coime out yet.

Vic Flange
9th Aug 2004, 09:20
Originally posted by Willmore
Ok, who said that they hate the game ?


Quite right - I've said on here that I liked Total War. I'm also looking forward to playing Rome, not just from a competition, but a gamer's point of view.

Joker II
9th Aug 2004, 09:36
I personnaly believe that every type of RTS, wether it's TW series, Cossacks, Imperial Glory etc add's certain aspects to there game that is not in others.

For example, Cossacks II will have massive armies, Imperial Glory will have a much more realistic behaviour of single soldiers and formations. Therefore, I believe that every game, as I said before as it's advantages and disadvantages wich makes it great to play different games, afteral, if there would be one superior game, noone else would play another one :D

Must say, the way it looks now, if you could have a combination of Cossacks II-Imperial Glory, that would become a combination very difficult to beat in my humble opinion :)

I understand that people have preferences, but that doesn't mean you can't like other type of RTS games.

To me, it is important that there is a big diversification in an RTS game, this is what it makes you want to keep on playing it.

Also, having different type's of RTS games going in the 'same' direction keeps the developers on the edge because they know they have to produce top knodge stuff to get it sold to there customers.

Oh yeah, by the way Vic, will there be a new trailer shown at GC in Leipzig :D Just curious ;)

See ya,
Joker ;)

Frederick the Great
9th Aug 2004, 15:01
First off, sorry Mr. Flange :( . I must say that not all senior members disapprove.

Second, I am DEFINETLEY not saying you should adopt the Total War engine at all, not only will it be a gesture of weakness on your behalf but it will also definetley be illegal w/o permission (that you are likely not to get anyhow).

I myself have never played Cossacks, but by the sounds of it it seems much too large a game to handle with ease. But still, Senior Members, do very much consider at least giving an OPTION to increase the average troop strength of each unit. Though it still might be fun to battle out 300 men against another 300, let me tell you that those battles will be no more than very minor skirmishes at most. It will lose (in my opinion) the true essence of the era, of massive armies clashing in bloodbaths such as Wagram, Leipzig, Austerlitz, Marengo, Salamanca, Borodino, and Waterloo.

It is really simple actually; for when I saw the trailer yesterday (which, BYW, I was extremely impressed with), I saw thirty men merge with another 30 or so men to form a stronger line. Here is a simple remedy... have units with 60 men inside without having to micromanage every small detachment! Have an option to do so, at least. For then when I buy this game, I shall change it to that setting immediatley (as will many others).

Regards

P.S. Can you answer my question regarding Napoleonic TW?

Willmore
9th Aug 2004, 15:46
1. The trailer was an early build and should not be judged upon.
2. You're working, based on so many misconceptions it's mindblowind.
a) Who told you that any developers of IE hate the TW series ?
b) Game engines are used in separate games by separate companies, they simply buy the right to use the engine, and the profit off of it is a big part of many game studios.
c) There is always a limit to the regiment, battaliion, company size. Having an option to change it would be far too cumbersome.

Mmm_Pies
10th Aug 2004, 14:19
"a) Who told you that any developers of IE hate the TW series ?"

They must've looked at it at least for the ideas they're having imo. I'm a huge total war fan. And i will almost certainly buy this game. I love the ability to hide in the terrain the way they've done it.

"c) There is always a limit to the regiment, battaliion, company size. Having an option to change it would be far too cumbersome."

I think what hes talking about is have a few settings al la TW small/default/medium/large. There by the amount of units can be set at an individual level depending on what u prefer or your pc can cope with.

On a side note i think that they've got enough units on the screen 2000 kept me entertained on TW, even if Rome will be bigger, therefore it will be fine on this. Alot does depend on the map size though imo as you want the map to be not too crowded for maneouvers and not too empty that it feels.... well empty.

Mike_B
10th Aug 2004, 15:56
Originally posted by Mmm_Pies
They must've looked at it at least for the ideas they're having imo.

Have a look at this preview (http://www.cdmag.com/articles/026/137/praetorians_preview.html) of Praetorians (also a Pyro Studios game) you'll see alot of features that they didn't implement in Praetorians but intented to do. Some of those ended up being in TW so it would be the other way around...

So before you out and say those things... you're dealing with Pyro fans here :)

found link

Mmm_Pies
11th Aug 2004, 08:36
Oh don't get me wrong if a develepor didn't look at its competition and implement the things they like into their games then they would be foolish.

I have preatorians and i thought it was a good game, but i felt it lacked diversity in nations, 3 just wasn't enough for me.

And i would say that the interface and game style i've seen in the screenshots it appears similar to TW, i'm no alone in that as others have commented to.


Some of those ended up being in TW so it would be the other way around...

I was only refering to the actual game that was produced. But we are both bias towards our own games that we like, and this is a game i will like.

AcceptGrits
5th Sep 2004, 22:19
TW is great. Particularly Shogun. Samurai units climbing huge hills while you desperately shoot them with your archers. Your whole army can actually rout with one wrong move. Battles in the dark/fog, raining heavily with occasional lighning that exposes the field while the AI is hiding in a huge forest. Awesome.

MTW i'm not too keen on. Fairly unbalanced units, and too much florins to boot. Campaigns get too repetitive.

As for Imperial Glory, i'm fine with 2000 soldiers. And 50 battlemaps, as long as memorable, I'm ok with it.

What I really anticipate is the naval battles. Hope for more info on that, like ship types, number of ships per battle etc.

Stiler
7th Sep 2004, 04:40
Originally posted by sick
So you are indirectly refering to Rome: Total War.
Rome: Total War looks very cool, but in trailers you can see that all the soldiers move on the same way at the same time, all the time.
The only thing I just love is when soldiers get trampled by elephants and horses, then you see them flying high.:D


Actually they have an "option" in the options to "un sync" the animations and things, so that al the units don't move at the excat same time. So it looks a lot better with it like that.

I do wish there were more "individual" looking units though, like a random different looking face here and there, etc.

Arctic_Wolf
7th Sep 2004, 19:34
Originally posted by Stiler
Actually they have an "option" in the options to "un sync" the animations and things, so that al the units don't move at the excat same time. So it looks a lot better with it like that.

Correct me if i'm wrong but I thought soldiers were supposed to march in sync, otherwise the formation would become dissorderly.

:confused:

Stiler
7th Sep 2004, 22:21
Originally posted by Arctic_Wolf
Correct me if i'm wrong but I thought soldiers were supposed to march in sync, otherwise the formation would become dissorderly.

:confused:

No no no, they stick to formations and things . I'm talking about the actual animations for each individual character.

Like the idle animations, say a calvery horse swinging it's tail or the knight on top moving his weapon or something, that way it looks more "real" so they don't have all the animations at the same time (IE all the horses in the entire calvery swinging their tails at the excat same time).

Arctic_Wolf
12th Sep 2004, 19:39
I've never seen an idle animation for a formation of troops happen at the same time, as you describe, before. I've seen them use the same animation but never on all of the units at the same time.