And after this?

[Dellathane]

Well CA have done the inevitable and made Rome II (no bad thing mind you). What I want to know is where they go from here. Presumably it's too soon for Empire II, and Medieval III seems like a long shot as well. Is it possible? Could it be? That we will get a new time period to playerrm... rule in.
Thoughts?
(Probably completely inappropriate to speculate on such things so soon after the announcement but this was my first thought when I heard)

[InsaneApache]

Millwall v Glasgow Rangers Total war 1980s stylie.

[Lemur]

I am probably all alone on this board in having big love for Empire. I still play it, although in highly modded form. There's just something about the period, about men in powdered wigs on wooden ships running all over the globe to stamp out dusky heathens ... I dunno, I love it. Even with the bugs and the irritations.

If they made an Empire II and gave it the kind of polish and shine they gave to Shogun II, I would be a happy little lemur indeed.

[quadalpha]

I hope they'll be a bit more adventurous with the TW formula rather than just slap a new setting on it. Personally I'd like to see a complete redesign of the interaction between the strategic and tactical layers, which has remained basically unchanged since the first Rome.

[easytarget]

They'll have a hard time taking risks with SEGA as the funding source. I'm already concerned about the possible "safe" directions they appear to be taking with Rome 2. If spending more money to develop means just making it prettier and scripted, personally, I'll be very disappointed. I don't need things prettier than Shogun 2, I need better AI. I, like most of the people who play TW, play it SP, the experiences I get are improved by how well the game plays over all at the battle and campaign map level. Seeing face animations isn't going to for me if to get there you purposely ran me through a per-determined path. I want to play this with agency, meaning I make the decisions, the outcome is unwritten, and each campaign takes it's own path.

[quadalpha]

They'll have a hard time taking risks with SEGA as the funding source. I'm already concerned about the possible "safe" directions they appear to be taking with Rome 2. If spending more money to develop means just making it prettier and scripted, personally, I'll be very disappointed. I don't need things prettier than Shogun 2, I need better AI. I, like most of the people who play TW, play it SP, the experiences I get are improved by how well the game plays over all at the battle and campaign map level. Seeing face animations isn't going to for me if to get there you purposely ran me through a per-determined path. I want to play this with agency, meaning I make the decisions, the outcome is unwritten, and each campaign takes it's own path.

Ah right, I hadn't thought about that. With the battering SEGA has been taking, they'll probably regard CA as a safe source of profit until things change.

I really don't get the obsession over the faces of the soldiers though. Does anyone ever look at them? They also claim that more detailed death animations (or something along those lines) make the player more attached to his men, which would be a rather futile attachment, since they'd already be dead!

[johnhughthom]

Millwall v Glasgow Rangers Total war 1980s stylie.

With Italian 'Ultras' and Turkish dlc.

[Peasant Phill]

I am probably all alone on this board in having big love for Empire. I still play it, although in highly modded form. There's just something about the period, about men in powdered wigs on wooden ships running all over the globe to stamp out dusky heathens ... I dunno, I love it. Even with the bugs and the irritations.

If they made an Empire II and gave it the kind of polish and shine they gave to Shogun II, I would be a happy little lemur indeed.

I support you
I really liked ETW as well and actually had a hard time switching back from guns to swords and spears.

Ah right, I hadn't thought about that. With the battering SEGA has been taking, they'll probably regard CA as a safe source of profit until things change.

I really don't get the obsession over the faces of the soldiers though. Does anyone ever look at them? They also claim that more detailed death animations (or something along those lines) make the player more attached to his men, which would be a rather futile attachment, since they'd already be dead!

I rarely look at animations. I don't mind them being there but I'm surely not asking for more. I do like dead bodies and bomb craters though. That really gives a sense about the scale of the battle you're fighting/just fought.

[Vuk]

I am probably all alone on this board in having big love for Empire. I still play it, although in highly modded form. There's just something about the period, about men in powdered wigs on wooden ships running all over the globe to stamp out dusky heathens ... I dunno, I love it. Even with the bugs and the irritations.

If they made an Empire II and gave it the kind of polish and shine they gave to Shogun II, I would be a happy little lemur indeed.

I loved Empire (after the patched it and removed those terrible bugs), but Rome (despite its horrible AI and the limitations of its time) had a charm to it, due to its setting, that none of the others have.

[Moros]

I'd personally would 'dig' an Assyria total war or something. I'd play it.

[Prussian to the Iron]

I think that if they were to do something original in the Total War series, they should do something along the lines of a mainland Asian setting; China to India, and possibly down to Indonesia. Someone more knowledgeable about Asian military history than myself would have to put a framing time period on that for me, but I think it would be interesting to have a few Chinese factions battling for control of China before turning attention to the South and West. The Mongols would at some point surge outward to attack China (and, being Total War, the rest of the map before their cavalry gets destroyed in the thick jungles of Southern Asia), and I'm sure that something would also be going on in India at the time. Simultaneously, small factions in the South (Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, etc.) would be battling it out for control of that area. Every general region (China, India, and the Southeast) would have its own internal warfare, as well as dealing with threats from neighboring areas. Also, unit variety would be retained (unlike Shogun 2 and Empire) due to the differences in each region and their specialized factions.

[Desertdude]

Only three years are left before the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War is over. I'd like to see that in Total War by 2015.

[EB rocks]

my thoughts are on dumdumdundundundumdumdundudun Hittite total war

[Martok]

I continue to hope for a Total War game set in either ancient Greece/Anatolia or -- especially -- during China's Warring States period. I'd play either one of those to death!

Only three years are left before the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War is over. I'd like to see that in Total War by 2015.

I still don't see that ever happening, as very few will want to play a Total War title with only two major factions -- there's just not much replayability there. I can perhaps see it working as an expansion (or part of one), but not a standalone game.

[Prussian to the Iron]

I still don't see that ever happening, as very few will want to play a Total War title with only two major factions -- there's just not much replayability there. I can perhaps see it working as an expansion (or part of one), but not a standalone game.

Agreed. Plus the unit variety would be terrible; almost all the units would have to be line infantry. There would probably be several different artillery units, and some elite units, and some light infantry, but the variety would be less than that in FotS.

[jaspritsingh]

I am still hoping for an India Total war ... with 3 ages ...

1. 1500s - When firearms brought the Mughals to power
2. 1600s - Firearms everywhere but war elephants still rule. Europeans show up, but like in SIITW, they just give tech n weapons
3. 1700s - Europeans are a faction among themselves. Its a 3 way contest - Indian Native Factions, Invaders from Afghanistan and Iran, European fielded mixed Native and European Armies.

[kambiz]

Although like majority of old total war fans myself wished for Rome2 to be done one day ,But I'm afraid it is too soon for CA to re-do ROME and I think can not repeat the success Rome1 had for them :( I wished for them to make something like 19th century total war game with global map instead of Rome.

[cunctator]

I would love to see a better version of Empire some day but for now I had enough of gunpowder warfare.
What was very rarely done before (and never properly) is Total War style game centered around the late Bronze Age middle east. The major factions as the Hittites, Mycenaean Greeks or Hittites are quite well known to a wider audience, as is chariot warfare. A dynamic period with no power totally dominating witnessing the rise and fall of Empires as the Mitanni or Assyrian becoming a grand power for the first time. Maybe starting in the mid 16th century BC shortly before or after Egypt was reunified an the Hyksos overwhelmed and with the Minoans still around.

[quadalpha]

I would love to see a better version of Empire some day but for now I had enough of gunpowder warfare.
What was very rarely done before (and never properly) is Total War style game centered around the late Bronze Age middle east. The major factions as the Hittites, Mycenaean Greeks or Hittites are quite well known to a wider audience, as is chariot warfare. A dynamic period with no power totally dominating witnessing the rise and fall of Empires as the Mitanni or Assyrian becoming a grand power for the first time. Maybe starting in the mid 16th century BC shortly before or after Egypt was reunified an the Hyksos overwhelmed and with the Minoans still around.

I don't think all or even most of those cultures had the kind of imperial ambitions associated with a Total War game.

[cunctator]

More than most Kingdoms in Medieval Europe. Egypt conquered Nubia and the Levante up to Northern Syria, the Hittites brought the states in western Asia minor under their control and expanded into Syria and finally Cyprus. The Egyptian empire at its peak was measuring 2000 km from its northern to southern borders. Stretching over as much or more territory than the whole Shogun map.
Mycenaeans conquered Crete and founded outposts in Asia minor were they clashed with the Hittites. Assyrian Kings captured Babylon and reached the Mediterranean and lake Van during their campaigns Mittani fought with all of them and were destroyed by their expansive neighbors.
This scenerio would also feature some spectacular cities and sieges. Even today the collapsed walls of Qatna, a syrian city destroyed by the Hittites, are rising 15 to 20 m above the surrounding plain.

[psysol]

Hi,
I am student of CA and enjoying it full time.

[edyzmedieval]

Medieval 3. I want a new Medieval game, but slim chance of having one. A new era most likely will be the next.

[Franconicus]

I would like to see a Thirty Years War sim. This is a very interesting age and still uncovered. American Civil War would also be fine to me.

[The Stranger]

world war one imo. they can pull it off now

world map, include the wars in the african colonies. add japan, improve greatly on naval battles and submarines.

[Prussian to the Iron]

I would like to see a Thirty Years War sim. This is a very interesting age and still uncovered. American Civil War would also be fine to me.

The big problem with the American Civil War is that there weren't any factions really; it was just North vs South. For a full release Total War title, this would get very dull, especially since most of the units would be identical (if not in name, then in stats, abilities, and overall role). I could see it possibly as a DLC down the line; if they decide to make an Empire 2 this might be a possible expansion.

world war one imo. they can pull it off now

world map, include the wars in the african colonies. add japan, improve greatly on naval battles and submarines.

The problem I think with WWI games is that, well, 90% of the game would be a 2 lines of troops sitting in trenches while artillery pounds each side. AFAIK there weren't any real line battles in WWI as there were in the 1800's, which would make Total War formations unrealistic. Plus you would have some aircraft and tanks as well, which would totally mess up the balance. Anything past WWI would be small, squad-based combat, and at that point it's not even Total War anymore, it's Company of Heroes, or Men of War.

I would certainly like to see how a WWI Total War title played out, and I trust that if they did make it, they would be completely confident in it before releasing it, and it would be great. It's just a matter of how they could make it, whether it would make sense for the Total War formula and general battle framework, and if it would be practical enough versus any of their other options.

[Narcisista]

Total War: Renaissance.

Covering, say 1500-1700.

Highlights:
Wars of Religion
30 Year's War
Japanese invasion of Korea
Manchurian conquest of China
Portuguese raiding in the Indian Ocean
80 Year's War
English Civil War
Spanish War of Sucession.
Italian Wars.
Ottoman Invasions.

[truth1337]

Russian football supporters total war!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyj8ZbJccT4

[Atepa]

I think that if they were to do something original in the Total War series, they should do something along the lines of a mainland Asian setting; China to India, and possibly down to Indonesia. Someone more knowledgeable about Asian military history than myself would have to put a framing time period on that for me, but I think it would be interesting to have a few Chinese factions battling for control of China before turning attention to the South and West. The Mongols would at some point surge outward to attack China (and, being Total War, the rest of the map before their cavalry gets destroyed in the thick jungles of Southern Asia), and I'm sure that something would also be going on in India at the time. Simultaneously, small factions in the South (Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, etc.) would be battling it out for control of that area. Every general region (China, India, and the Southeast) would have its own internal warfare, as well as dealing with threats from neighboring areas. Also, unit variety would be retained (unlike Shogun 2 and Empire) due to the differences in each region and their specialized factions.

I believe the timeframe you're talking about regarding China is around the time of the Fall of the Han Dynasty, and into the Three Kingdoms Period (220-280 BC) This is the time period probably most known by Westerners as it is the period that has been exposed the most. Recently there was a movie based around the time period (Red Cliff, which by the way is a great movie) and most of the Dynasty Warrior games take place in that time frame as well I believe.

I'm not sure how active the Mongols were in that period, but apparently Attila was around the mid 450. With that said, I would love to see a Total war around either of those eras. I'd say another time frame to be around the unification of ancient Egypt as well as another timeframe, but I think it would play out too similar to Rome TW (maybe it could be an xpack/DLC for it)

[Kadagar_AV]

I honestly think Rome and Medieval offers the most varied battles, and fit the engine and game concept best.

I am, however, desperately hoping for a fantasy TW.... That could even open the game up to be an E-sport if they do it right.

[aimlesswanderer]

China during the 3 Kingdoms would be fantastic, and maybe the Sui and Tang (includes attempted invasions of Korea plus uniting large parts of the country). Plenty of feral nomads, non Chinese tribes, pirates, rebels and unhappy peasants galore, and neighboring kingdoms (Korea and Japan especially).

And maybe one set during the rise of the Achaemenids. Plenty of variety there.