EP for empire

[The Blind Samurai]

I know its a little early since ETW has not been released anyway after the guys at CA are done what do you figure the expansion will focus on any ideas ??? I really hope they make one the focuses on the Indian Wars and recreate The Battle of Little Bighorn and give the sioux the opportunity to push the settlers off there land and keep em off

[Sheogorath]

I'd hope for something like Kingdoms, with, say, a focus on the German States, India, the American colonies and maybe Eastern/Northern Europe.

[The Blind Samurai]

no just focus on one thing the expansion of America

[Sheogorath]

I'd, personally, think that the Great Northern War would be far more interesting than the American Revolution and so forth, considering the nature of most of the fighting would not be well rendered by ETW's engine, from what I've seen.

[Martok]

Personally, I'd love to see the Thirty Years War. A bunch of different factions were involved, and represent one of the last major armed conflicts in Europe that focused on religion. I'd be very interested to see this. :yes:

[CBR]

Yeah so far we have seen expansions like the Mongol Invasion/Barbarian Invasion that reused the original campaign map but with other faction(s) and era or Viking Invasion/Kingdoms that was more mini campaigns. It will have to be something with multiple factions or it will be a pretty meaningless expansion.

Mini campaigns focusing on northern Europe and central Europe for Great Northern War and Seven Year War like scenarios could be a nice option. The Thirty Years War would be one of my favorites too.


CBR

[The Blind Samurai]

they should focus on the like the the seven years war and the Indian wars and the 30 years war would be cool

[Sheogorath]

The Thirty Years War is a bit before the games time period, though, isnt it? Pikes were still a legitimate, mainstream weapon, and I'm fairly sure the flintlock musket wasnt even really in widespread use at the start of the war.
Considering the new engine and all, it doesnt seem like it'd work very well.

One of the reasons I'd say the Great Northern War would be a good 'Kingdoms'-like expansion was that there werent a ton of people involved. Kingdoms focused on a smaller area with more details. the Great Northern War would be a good way for a few factions to have a good ol' slugfest.

Another interesting option might be something set in India. There was a point when British domination wasnt assured, and the various Indian states were quite powerful, even after the Mughals died out. Might be interesting.

[Gustav II Adolf]

I would love to play through the thirty years war but don't think it will happen. A good depiction of combat from that era would require integrated musket and pike units which is difficult to do. The great northern war would also be cool and easier to do. Still, my bet is on Napoleon. It has been done many times before and will probably be done again. I guess more people are familiar with the Napoleonic era.





----

[CBR]

Considering the new engine and all, it doesnt seem like it'd work very well.
Since both weapons should be included in ETW it should not be a problem.


A good depiction of combat from that era would require integrated musket and pike units which is difficult to do.
The inability to depict mixed units has not stopped CA from making their earlier titles. In the ETW era there should also be lance armed cavalry with just the first rank equipped with lances.


CBR

[The Blind Samurai]

please if you have nothing useful to add dont post maybe they should focus on the war of 1812

[Csargo]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=101545&highlight=expansion

[Martok]

@knight of graal: While I appreciate your enthusiasm, spamming is not allowed here. Please restrict your posts to discussing the relevant topic(s).



maybe they should focus on the war of 1812
Only if they do so in the larger context of the Napoleonic Wars. Otherwise we'll just have another fight between two factions (U.S. & British), and we're already going to have that in the American Independence campaign.

[The Blind Samurai]

yeah that is true i would like to step into the shoes of Napoleon and conquer much of europe along with parts of africa and asia maybe even win the battle of Waterloo

[Rhyfelwyr]

I hope the era of pike and musket gets its own full game. Since CA say they do two titles for each engine (ie Shogun/MTW, then RTW/M2TW), I hope that a game from around 1500-1700 will follow ETW.

[Martok]

I hope the era of pike and musket gets its own full game. Since CA say they do two titles for each engine (ie Shogun/MTW, then RTW/M2TW), I hope that a game from around 1500-1700 will follow ETW.
While your reasoning makes sense, I wouldn't count on that happening. If history is anything to go by, then CA's next title will almost surely be in an entirely different era/region. More specifically, I highly doubt that they'd want their next game to be in a period that's so close in time to that covered by Empire. That would be akin to them having developed a Dark Ages title after MTW -- it'd be too close and too similar to the previous one.

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if CA doesn't make a Renaissance-era game at some point. I just think it'll most likely be at least several years before we see that happen. :yes:

[pevergreen]

Well, based on the fact they will use the same engine, what other eras had lots of ranged combat and naval combat?
(i dont know :shrug:)

[Mount Suribachi]

The fact that the game ends in what, 1812? gives a big clue to me - They've stopped short of the full Napoleonic thing. Maybe someone else has it trademarked? ~;)

Maybe a separate campaign thing like in Kingdoms? Egypt, Russia and Iberia?

Failing that I expect the American Civil War with a full MP campaign ~:)

[PBI]

Huh? I thought the end date was 1820.

[The Blind Samurai]

The American Civil War could work and maybe for a historical battle they could add The Battle of Little Big Horn

[Sol Invictus]

Thirty Years War of Great Northern War gets my vote.:2thumbsup:

[Martok]

The fact that the game ends in what, 1812? gives a big clue to me - They've stopped short of the full Napoleonic thing. Maybe someone else has it trademarked? ~;)


Huh? I thought the end date was 1820.
PBI is correct, Suribachi -- ETW is supposed to run til 1820. Also, CA has already stated it's entirely possible (although not guaranteed), that a certain Corsican may rise to prominence in the French army.... ~D



Failing that I expect the American Civil War with a full MP campaign ~:)

The American Civil War could work and maybe for a historical battle they could add The Battle of Little Big Horn
Good gravy, I hope not! First off, there's already an over-emphasis on us with the American Independence campaign -- adding the Civil war would simply be overkill.

Also, from a gameplay standpoint, Shogun's Mongol Invasion already proved that two-faction campaigns tend to not be very much fun (although I grant you have a point in that at least a MP campaign would then be possible). And again, we're already going to have exactly that (a two-faction campaign) with the American Independence campaign.

[Mailman653]

What would make me super happy is seeing the War of 1812 develop during a campaign.
The US Civil War, albiet pretty neat, way over done. The US Revolution, War of 1812, not nearly as much.

[rajpoot]

And again, we're already going to have exactly that (a two-faction campaign) with the American Independence campaign.

??No French, Spanish and the Red-Indians?? :inquisitive: They've got to be there!

[Mount Suribachi]

PBI is correct, Suribachi -- ETW is supposed to run til 1820. Also, CA has already stated it's entirely possible (although not guaranteed), that a certain Corsican may rise to prominence in the French army.... ~D


OK, I missed that memo. I just remember when it ETW was first announced and they were a bit cagey about the end date, it sounded for all the world like it was going to end before the Napoleonic Wars kick in - which set off my Internal Expansion Pack Alarm. And the whole marketing of the game so far seems to have gone out of its way to avoid all metion of the N word. Why? :inquisitive:

Yes, you could argue there is an over-emphasis on the American side, but where is the biggest games market outside of Japan? And the simple fact is that many of the major stores in America won't stock strategy games and the like if America aren't in it :juggle2: Just the way it is.

As for the MP campaign, personally I couldn't give 2 hoots for it, but I know it is a holy grail for many here. I would think that a 2 or 3 faction campaign would be ideal for it, and I always expected the American War of Independence to be the one they would do, but I guess others could be the Peninsular War or the ACW.

[PBI]

Personally I would like a Thirty Years War/English Civil War expansion, although hopefully this period will get a game of its own (*ahem* after they do China *ahem*).

Alternatively, an expansion focusing on one of the continents not in Empire might be good; either a Scramble for Africa campaign, or perhaps South American struggles for independence (or at a stretch, the War of the Triple Alliance, although that one might be a bit too dark for TW).

[Belgolas]

Please please please please CA don't go into any more of America's history. That would be sooooo boring. I don't want 2 faction campaings! Plus america should really be an important faction at all in ETW and should get roally handed to them if they try and take on an european country. I think it is funny when every shot of the naval battes is tthe US versus the British when in history I don't think the US won any naval battles against the British in this time period!

I will state this again. If Britain really cared about the US not being independant then the US would have lost really really bad. All britain needed to do was send over a small portion of its army! If it would have sent like 100000 men then the US would have had no chance.

If anything do something on Asia. Although naval wouldn't be so great.

[rajpoot]

I will state this again. If Britain really cared about the US not being independant then the US would have lost really really bad. All britain needed to do was send over a small portion of its army! If it would have sent like 100000 men then the US would have had no chance.


I doubt it was the half hearted effort of the British that caused the USA to gain its indipendance. It was the effort of the colonies, and their allies, to some extent, that did it for them. And also the circumstances..........Britain was if I'm not wrong occupied in other places at that time. Agreed they had a large force, but all that force was more or less occupied. Furthermore, it was Cornwallis who surrendered and signed the treaty, as a representative of the king........not the king himself.

[Martok]

Please please please please CA don't go into any more of America's history. That would be sooooo boring.
From a gameplay standpoint, I agree. Prior to World War 1, most of America's military conflicts involved only one other major opponent. Ergo, the U.S. is not very fertile ground for a Total War game.



I don't want 2 faction campaings! Plus america should really be an important faction at all in ETW and should get roally handed to them if they try and take on an european country. I think it is funny when every shot of the naval battes is tthe US versus the British when in history I don't think the US won any naval battles against the British in this time period!
Not quite accurate -- the United States did have some success against the UK's Great Lakes fleet during the War of 1812 -- but overall, your point is a valid one.

I would hope that anyone playing as America really has to struggle to survive, especially in the early years of their independence. For them to go toe-to-toe with a major European power by themselves (i.e., they'd need another European power as an ally) should be tantamount to suicide.



I will state this again. If Britain really cared about the US not being independant then the US would have lost really really bad. All britain needed to do was send over a small portion of its army! If it would have sent like 100000 men then the US would have had no chance.

Well as india already pointed out, Britain's army -- and just as importantly, its treasury -- was stretched rather thin around the time we were starting to get....uppity. ~D Given the circumstances at the time, it's remarkable that George III was able to devote as much of his country's war machine to us as he did.

As it was, we still only barely pulled it off. We needed the help of the French, along with the Crown's determination that India was more valuable to them than we were. ~;p

[rajpoot]

the Crown's determination that India was more valuable to them than we were. ~;p

Quite right there, they held on for quite a long time, despite the fact that for atleast a hundred years there were many a separate wars and battles, small time chieftains and some spirited kings revolting time and again........ofcourse stuff changed after 1857..........there were no battles after that....the annexation stopped, as did the rebellions.
It makes me doubt that they'll be able to any expansion for ETW concerning India beyond 1820........hardly 40 year of total war after that.

[Lusitani]

I know this is totally of the line of what might be expected but...it would be interesting if , like Kingdoms, they would make several campaigns (4 perhaps) that would cross the Total War titles so far.
That would give us an ancient period, a medieval, a medieval japan and a another one for the ETW period. All of course using the new engine and possibilities and of course sea battles.
Then again maybe not... :laugh4::juggle2:

[Sabuti]

If it was the Indian Wars. It would 1st have to run through the US Civil War. It probably wouldn't be this though. I'm thinking the next game will be 1800-1900.

[Ishmael]

Add discovery and colonisation of Australia and New Zealand

[adembroski]

The primary reason, and it's a good one, for the addition of the American Civil War is because it marked a dramatic change in warfare. It marked the end of Napoleonic tactics, as weaponry became far more effective than before.

Adding the American Revolution and the American Civil War is not "overkill", it's highlighting two world-wide turning points in history, and because, well, where's the biggest video game market in the world?

To the Europeans that seem to have their sensibilities offended by the mention of the United States: there have now been 4 Total War games, with 5 expansions. That's 9 releases, with Europe being the major focus in 6 of them. "America" has appeared in 2, with only 1 campaign specifically focusing on it... and no sign of the United States anywhere. Not wrongly, of course, the United States did not exist at the time, obviously, but to call 2 elements of American history "overkill" after the coverage the rest of the world has gotten is a bit over the top.