Empire: Total War Message Board  

I agree. How are they ganna advertise this game "Everything we meant ETW to be but were to lazy to do. Think of ETW as the beta of NTW, dont worry we didnt cheat you outa your money at all <.<" in the mean time ETW is getting another dlc that adds basically nothing except pointless new units. Id rather pay 3.99 for a patch that would 100% fix the game then for a few extra new units that modders could make. Modders already have done a better job at fixing the game and making it more fun, Darth Mod Ultimate Commander is the mod of all mods and it is friggen great. Check it out at twcenter.net.

I used a turn editor to make each year in the campaign 52 turns long.

I play the Long Campaign and never run out of turns.

You can find the editor here:

www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=240167

You can set each year to 500 turns a piece if you want.

No its not stupid American ignorance... I am american too and i never understood where the hell he got this great britain arrogance thing from... I knew he wasnt english and ya he may be wrong about the number of wars... But we all have stupid people, american, british, dutch, mexican, french, etc... but even without the stupid people we are still people and can still make mistakes. Not sayin either one is stupid, jus givin them the benefit of the doubt and maybe they made mistakes.

Though i have to say... As bad ass as Napoleon is, Id rather focus more on the civil war so they better let me pick america in the next capmaign... it would be nice if they opened up more of the world and more countries, id like to play as some eastern countries too, especially the japanese... or even more of a challenge, i LOVE play as the native american tribes... rewrite history as how it SHOULD HAVE BEEN... but the past is the past...

I will look into the 52 turn thing, thanks!!!
But I wish they remade Shogun to play on win7.

dont know if anybody noticed but that sharp guy that started was actually polish.... wow...

What???

You had the Italian wars of Unification, you had the Crimea war, you also had the Wars of German Unification, the 19 centuary is 1000x better than the 17th in my opinion. I agree Napoleon should span from 1799 to 1900 or somthing, however, I can only think that the detail would be lost.

[Edited by Gontak, 2/27/2010 1:01:27 PM]

I disagree. The 19th century was by far the most pacific century in world history. The philosophic emphasis on balance of power begun by Metternich kept European wars small and focused--even though it is ultimately responsible for creating the conditions whereby world war became an inevitability in the early 20th century. The Crimean War was only significant for its social impact in Britain. The wars of Italian and German unification occur across two or maybe three of ETW's provinces and were short and bloodless when compared to conflicts of the 17th and 18th century.

The 19th century is significant for European domination over Africa, India and Asia--not for game-worthy military conflicts.

I wouldn't want CA making a game focusing on anything but Europe--every game made by Euros, CA is a British company, that looks at anything else is supercilious in its overall treatment and infuriatingly generalized in its details. Look at the treatment of North America in ETW for evidence.

Whereas the 17th and 18th centuries saw almost endless war across the continent of Europe--from vast dynastic struggles to petty landgrabs--as well as the advance of science and technology to create a societal machine for war out of several countries in Europe.

Since ETW covers the 18th century, and NTW now covers the Napoleonic Wars...the only large-scale conflict in 19th century Europe...the obvious would be to look at the 17th century.

Typical English arrogance? Are you refering to Sharp911's comment? For a start, he's from Poland, secondly the word you're looking for is 'ignorance', and finally, that's a racist generalisation, so kindly stfu and go troll some where else.