Graphically the game is quite successful. It still looks a little better than "Empire: Total War". Thus, there are now as impact craters from shells on the ground to admire and much nicer explosion effects. Gunsmoke and muzzle flashes are realistically depicted and more intense than in "Empire".
The units and uniforms are beautifully presented in detail. Especially can be seen far more different faces at the individual soldier compared to "Empire". If riders are killed, now flee sometimes even surviving horses from the battle. Besides drummers now march even with Piper in the regiments.
Technically the game is also rounder than "Empire" at release. There are actually no crashes, stuttering or larger bugs that would make the game unplayable.
But what good is the most beautiful graphics and good technique, when the game has little long-term fun in the long run is rather boring? Despite better graphics and technology, I feel "Empire" as the better game because it offers a lot more fun and the replay value is much higher.
What's to complain about the game now? On the one hand, there are only 5 playable factions. France, Great Britain, Prussia, Russia and Austria. "Empire" offered because many more factions (in addition to the 5 aforementioned inter alia Poland, Spain, Sweden Ottomans, Marahten, USA), who also played a lot of different and far more varied owned units. With the exception of France, the unit selection at the fractions also acts altogether somehow restricted and a little immature.
The campaign map the main campaign is much too small and limited. It does everything from only in (northern) Europe. Turkey and North Africa are missing from the main campaign completely (only the mini-campaigns include those areas). Characterized the Kamapgnenkarte is even smaller than that of "Rome" and "Medieval 2"! "Empire" offered by its global scale far more variety and knew much longer motivate.
With the small campaign card size, another problem comes into play: battles hardly play a role. Why should I spend money on a fleet, if I anyway only conquer territories on the European continent to 90%? In "Empire" it has made sense to send fleets to America or India, to try the most lucrative trading post to conquer. In "Napoleon" Unfortunately, all this plays no role.
Unfortunately, the campaign AI abounds not with intelligence. For example, if I play as opponents of France, it is almost impossible weld together the other major nations to form an alliance against France. No, instead, want the AI nations prefer that I am alliances against Switzerland or the Ottomans with them. If the AI Contrary to expectations, but with my ally against France, it unfortunately does not send troops to participate in the war, but waits in their area from just until it is over by France.
Historical Napoleonic Wars against France are therefore virtually unfeasible. This seems a little France "Overpowered" since it has the most units and must always only fight against an opponent at a time.
The game would have been a lot more interesting and motivating, if the main campaign would include the territories of North Africa and Turkey and other groups such as Spain, Sweden and the Ottomans would have been playable. So the game is boring but because it offers little variety.
Conclusion: The battles look great and are fun, the campaign portion of the game (for me the core of each "Total War" game) is unfortunately boring quite fast and has little long-term motivation and variety of what playable especially on the small menu and only 5 fractions is.
Pro:
+ Beautiful graphics & effects
+ Good Sounds
+ Detailed units
+ Little Bugs
+ Great battlefield atmosphere
Cons:
- Only 5 playable factions
- Low unit selection
- Hardly playful differences between factions
- Limited Kamp Agen Map
- Naval battles useless
- Silly campaigns KI
- Little variety / surprises in the campaign
-