I need more men!

[Admiral Vostok]

I haven't posted for quite some time, but I have been looking at new screenshots every now and then. One thing has become apparent to me from the screenshots: there just isn't enough infantry.

 

Everything else in this game looks absolutely fantastic. The space battles look awesome, and I feel this is mostly because they've made them look a lot like the movies.

 

But the ground battles do not look at all like the movies. Why? It's not because of the inclusion of non-Canon units as some of my critics may be anticipating, but rather it is the distinct lack of infantry. Looking through all the screenshots, the most infantry I can see in a single screenshot is 30... and this is counting both sides together! That is not an army, it's a squad.

 

Now it can't be that their aren't enough resources in the engine to handle masses of infantry, since we've seen in the screenshots that masses of fighters are common in space battles. So why is it?

 

At this point I'm of the belief that this is the only thing wrong with EaW; there is just not enough infantry, or at least not enough reasons to use infantry. This must be amended!

 

Petroglyph claims we can recreate the battles of the Star Wars Saga. To para-phrase Moff Jerjerrod: "They ask the impossible. I need more men!"

[lukeiamyourdad]

VERY true.

 

I also noticed the strangely small scale of ground battles vs space battles. I HOPE that we only see a part of the ground battles.

[Darth Windu]

I agree, although there are other problems. In addition to the lack of infantry, there is also a glaring lack of diversity in infantry (ie there seems to be only one infantry unit) and far too many vehicles, like Imperial Hover-tanks, of course in addition to the lack of the Republic and Confederacy

[Juggernaut1985]

Maybe its because vehicles are more used than infantry. It suits my purpose perfectly.

[lukeiamyourdad]

In which war have you seen less infantry then vehicles?

 

 

Windu: Well, there's the standard trooper and what looks like a rocket trooper...so yeah you're right.

[swphreak]

If you've played Generals, you'd remember how little infantry had to do. Vehicles were used most, but the occasional rocket troop hording is deadly to tanks... anywho

 

It doesn't really bother me as much as everyone else. I'd rather be throwing tanks and stuff at my enemies than mere infantry. Besides, I'll most likely be playing more space battles than ground...

[Admiral Vostok]

Maybe its because vehicles are more used than infantry.

No they aren't.

If you've played Generals, you'd remember how little infantry had to do. Vehicles were used most, but the occasional rocket troop hording is deadly to tanks... anywho

Exactly, and that was one of my biggest gripes about Generals. If gamemakers want to make realistic games they're going to have to realise that they need to make infantry worth taking.

 

In Generals there wasn't much incentive to take infantry. Sure they could garrison buildings, but when a couple of Dragon Tanks can kill everyone in the building that doesn't sound nearly as attractive. And at the relative cost of infantry to vehicles, it was always better to get more vehicles.

 

Infantry should be cheap, possibly deployed in squads, and far more flexible than vehicles. Gamers should have a NEED to purchase infantry, not just use them as a go between until vehicles are available.

 

Please fix this Petroglyph. Your space battles look flawless, but at the moment the ground battles look quite uninspiring, let alone looking nothing like the films.

[jedi3112]

First of all in generals infantry may not have been usefull, but generals failed miserably and THAT game killed the C&C series (not an easy thing to do, but EA managed to do just that).

 

Second, during the battle of Hoth I haven't seen the rebels using anything other than infantry and airspeeders. I think infantry should be able to hide in the rocks (somewhat like Force Commander) I also think more diversity in infantry would do the game good and I would like to see infantry moving grouped in squads, and the rest as single units (also aircraft in gound battles as single units) in space battles aircraft should be in squads.

 

Also I want to know for sure if the AT-PT will be in it or not, so far I haven't seen anything official about it being either in or out. It just doesn't make sense if the AT-PT is left out and some genius decided to have a Crawler do the very same thing, while the AT-PT fits in much better. They could have the AT-PT as main anti-infantry unit for the empire and have the crawler as a quick and much lighter anti-infantry version, used for when the enemy tries to flee (but I would use a fighter for that).

[Cheech Marin]

What's the point of having infantry in a set-piece battle in an open field? They'll just get squashed by a tank or a walker without putting a dent in it. I noticed from the pics that the infantry tend to stand in the open in large clumps, presenting a lovely target for an AT-AT or a Y-Wing. Infantry should really have an advantage over armoured vehicles in city and forest fights, just like they do in real life.

[DK_Viceroy]

As a player who flooded the field with Infantry more times than I care to count I'm on the side of Infantry but I must point out to Vostok though that the Movies do not show enough diverse units to make a ground army the Prequels do indeed because the war was more of the storyline but in the case of the OT the focus was on individuals so the role of EU here is critical the Rebels are in obviuos need of something that can stand a chance against an AT-AT it's the elusive quality known as balance. After all AT-AT's and AT-ST's do not an army make, especially as I remember in our forum games were Assault Mechs were rarely used unless carefully supported and said player was already winning.

 

Alamo the EaW engine strikes me as a very capable engine and I would also like to point out that at this stage of development Petroglyph will be concentrating on gettting everything right before putting a strain test on it I predict later we shall see more epic screenshots and until a later date I think we should hold off commenting on things.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by Cheech Marin

What's the point of having infantry in a set-piece battle in an open field?

 

http://www.lucasarts.com/games/swempireatwar/images/screenshots/22.jpg

 

These guys are NOT staying behind certain cover.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

If you've played Generals, you'd remember how little infantry had to do. Vehicles were used most, but the occasional rocket troop hording is deadly to tanks... anywho

Respectfully, why do people keep making references to Generals specifically? This game has so little to do with Generals. Granted, they're both RTS games, but why always Generals rather than Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Starcraft (at least that's a sci-fi game:rolleyes:!), or Heroes of Might and Magic III, or WarCraft II?

 

It doesn't really bother me as much as everyone else. I'd rather be throwing tanks and stuff at my enemies than mere infantry.

Exactly. Which you're not supposed to be doing.

 

Look at all the ground battles in Star Wars. Look at the battle of the Naboo plains, the battle of Hoth, the battle of Theed, the battle of Geonosis, and the Battle of Endor. Then look at nearly every land battle in human history - which is what SW is based on, after all. Infantry is numerically superior.

 

As was said, a majority of vehicles totally spoils the Star Wars feel.

 

Besides, I'll most likely be playing more space battles than ground...

I doubt it, as capturing planets will be a large part of the game.

 

There are tonnes of alternatives to infantry (not that they're really needed, but it'll greatly help). Infantry played a huge role in Ground Control, and yet each side had only two types of infantry: Marines, Jaegers, Crusaders, and Templars. They could be given special weapons and equipment like Mortars, bombs, HEAT rockets, and cloaking devices, though, which made them really diverse. A single squad of marines could easily take out a squad of heavy hover dynes if you only get them positioned so that they hit the rear armour and then let loose a barrage of HEAT marine squad rockets!

 

If there are only going to be one or two types of infantry per side in EaW, at least please give them some special weapons or equipment!

[swphreak]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

Respectfully, why do people keep making references to Generals specifically? This game has so little to do with Generals. Granted, they're both RTS games, but why always Generals rather than Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Starcraft (at least that's a sci-fi game:rolleyes:!), or Heroes of Might and Magic III, or WarCraft II?

 

Because Petrowhatever didn't make those games. They made the [older] CnC Games, and like it or not, the ground combat highly resembles Generals to me.

 

Exactly. Which you're not supposed to be doing.

 

Look at all the ground battles in Star Wars. Look at the battle of the Naboo plains, the battle of Hoth, the battle of Theed, the battle of Geonosis, and the Battle of Endor. Then look at nearly every land battle in human history - which is what SW is based on, after all. Infantry is numerically superior.

 

As was said, a majority of vehicles totally spoils the Star Wars feel.

 

I'm sorry, I missed the part where I had to play the exact same way you do.

 

I doubt it, as capturing planets will be a large part of the game.

 

We'll see

 

 

And I don't see how Generals "killed" CnC. If I'm not mistaken, Generals and Zero Hour sold quite nicely, and I remember in an interview a while back that said they were planning to make another CnC.

[lukeiamyourdad]

CnC Generals is disliked by many fans of the serie.

It's not the first time I hear CnC Generals "killed" the serie.

 

You don't have to play the exact same way somebody else does, it's a question of realism that infantry numbers should normally be higher then vehicle numbers. You can use vehicles only if you wish, that's you, but if the only thing on the huge battlefield are vehicles on both side, we have a problem.

 

Besides, it's a also a question of epicness. Seeing a few vehicles fighting would ressemble a small scale skirmish, while large numbers of different types of units is much more epic.

 

Anyway, the game should encourage infantry to always be useful, even after you get the AT-AT.

[DK_Viceroy]

I'll point this out right now though it doesn't matter what they do to make Infantry useful their will be some people, *makes a sideways glance at Vostok while Muttering Air Whore* who will spam one type of unit and usually only that unit alone. I myself am a prime culprit of Spamming Infantry but then I usually mix things up occasionally.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Luke refuted all your arguments but the one of planets:

 

How can planetary capture not be a big part of the game? It is in every single 4x/RTS game I've played so far, and I don't see how EaW will be an exception: Planets will be home to your ground and orbital facilities and give you an income, meaning that once you start losing them, you start losing the advantage from having them. It's like the Islands RMS in Age of Empires II: You can focus on naval combat all you like, but in the end you have to invade the enemy islands to take their buildings out.

[Darth Andrew]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

Look at all the ground battles in Star Wars. Look at the battle of the Naboo plains, the battle of Hoth, the battle of Theed, the battle of Geonosis, and the Battle of Endor. Then look at nearly every land battle in human history - which is what SW is based on, after all. Infantry is numerically superior.

[/b]

When I last checked, this was called Empire At War, not Republic At War. In the game, there won't be any giant battles with masses of droids and clones fighting (but that's why I hope for an expansion;) ). Episodes I-III's battles focus on mass infantry engagements, but IV-VI have more of a mix of infantry and vehicles. I don't know about you, but even if I had divisions of diverse infantry, I'd rather have a single division of walkers in the Star Wars universe.

[lukeiamyourdad]

Of course, walkers and vehicles would be "technically" stronger then infantry but the smart player will flank or strike a vehicle in the rear or something with his more mobile infantry.

Ambushing is also easier with infantry.

 

 

But you said it yourself a mix of infantry and vehicles.

This is what the game should encourage.

[Darth Windu]

This is exactly why there should be a smaller number of units in the game rather than the approach Petroglyph seem to be taking of "if it was in EU or the films, we'll include it". Infantry are historically the cheapest and most versitile military units. Armour (Mechanised) forces exist to SUPPORT infantry, not to replace them, and that is the way these units should be portrayed.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Episodes I-III's battles focus on mass infantry engagements, but IV-VI have more of a mix of infantry and vehicles.

Wrong again. In Episode I there were Trade Federation tanks, in Episode II there were gunships, missile droids, and lots of other combat droids, and in Episode III... Well, I haven't seen it yet:o .

 

Ep 4 didn't have a mass ground battle, but Ep 5 had one and it had tonnes of infantry. Ep 6 had the battle of Endor, which was almost all-infantry and a few walkers, speeder bikes, hang gliders, etc. scattered about.

[swphreak]

Yet the soldiers on Hoth got their behinds handed to them by tanks. kthxbai.

 

Endor's Moon was a fluke because the good guys always win.

 

Infantry are no good when a tank can easily take them out.

[Juggernaut1985]

Originally posted by Darth Windu

This is exactly why there should be a smaller number of units in the game rather than the approach Petroglyph seem to be taking of "if it was in EU or the films, we'll include it". Infantry are historically the cheapest and most versitile military units. Armour (Mechanised) forces exist to SUPPORT infantry, not to replace them, and that is the way these units should be portrayed.

 

So you support LESS epic battles and fewer choices of strategy in favor of spamming?

 

This is how you said it.

[BeBop]

Originally posted by StarWarsPhreak

Yet the soldiers on Hoth got their behinds handed to them by tanks.

 

You really think it was tanks that stormed the inside of the base?

[lukeiamyourdad]

Originally posted by Juggernaut1985

So you support LESS epic battles and fewer choices of strategy in favor of spamming?

 

This is how you said it.

 

No, he said have fewer but more versatile units.

 

 

And Bebop is right. Infantry IS a necessity and people have to think about using them even when large walkers are available.

 

Remember, there was only a few AT-ST on Endor, but plenty of infantry.

There was only a few AT-AT at Hoth, but lots of infantry.

[Darth Andrew]

Wrong again. In Episode I there were Trade Federation tanks, in Episode II there were gunships, missile droids, and lots of other combat droids, and in Episode III... Well, I haven't seen it yet .

In case you didn't notice, beside a few dozen AATs and MTTs, there were thousands of Gungan grunts, and thousands more battle droids in Episode I. Yes, in Episode II, there were (from what I could tell from the movie) hundreds of vehicles, but there were hundreds of thousands of infantry battle droids and clone troopers. All I'm saying is that the Episodes IV-VI don't have divisions upon divisions of infantry slaughtering each other, but have more of a few hundred troops supported by a dozen or so vehicles, so the infantry don't greatly outnumber the vehicles by a ton. I do agree that infantry are an important asset in battle, though.