After Rome Total War?

[Morgan Frydman]

Does anyone know what the Total War franchise will make next, after Rome?

I would think that maybe a Napoleanic game would be quite good. Moving large formations of musketeers and stuff. (Did anyone ever watch those Sharpe TV programmes with Sean Bean)

Either that or set in ancient times. Like bronze/Iron age Middle East. You could be the Babylonians, Hittites, Assyrians, Persians or Egyptians. It would be cool to have chariots in a battle.

[munrock]

I reckon China and the Sanguo period.

[Papewaio]

Why not Star Wars: Total War

No problem with the concept of Jedi Generals anymore.

But I don't think the Total War Engine could model stormtroopers... there is after all a minimum chance to hit which means even peasants hit more often then stormies in the movies... :pimp:

:knight:

[Despot of the English]

I would think that maybe a Napoleanic game would be quite good. Moving large formations of musketeers and stuff. (Did anyone ever watch those Sharpe TV programmes with Sean Bean)

Yep, got the lot on DVD ~:smoking: .

I'd be happy with anything but an upgraded MTW or Shogun would be excellent too. For MTW there could be many more provinces and upgraded graphics and diplomacy.

[Morgan Frydman]

I'd be happy with anything but an upgraded MTW or Shogun would be excellent too. For MTW there could be many more provinces and upgraded graphics and diplomacy.

Maybe a game concentrating solely on the Crusades, or the Saffavid Persians vs Arabs. Or concentrating on the Mongol conquests, the objective being to unite Mongol tribes and conquer as much of central Asia as possible.

I'd prefer an ancient timeframe personally, but any time period would probably be good.

[Morgan Frydman]

I reckon China and the Sanguo period.

I'm not too knowledgeable on Chinese history. When was the Sanguo period?

[eeyoredragon]

I'm not too knowledgeable on Chinese history. When was the Sanguo period?

:bow:
"Sanguo" means Three Kingdoms in Chinese, and is dated back to 220 A.D.. It's one of the most well-known periods in China's history. It was a time when troops of Wei, Shu and Wu kingdoms, into which the country was divided, fought fierce battles against each other.

[munrock]

I should add that it wasn't just three kigdoms... I mean, it boiled down to three kingdoms as the end came near (like how Total War campaigns always come down to a handful of superpowers)... but in the beginning China was fractured into loads of political entities by the fall of the Han Dynasty.

It was an interesting and dangerous time to be alive if you were in politics. It probably sucked if you were a peasant.

[Ar7]

I'd love to see MTW2. Many many more provinces, like in the Paradox games, also more diplomacy options, better graphics etc.

[King Edward]

It was an interesting and dangerous time to be alive if you were in politics. It probably sucked if you were a peasant.


When does it not suck to be a peasant???

[nindustrial]

Taking a page from a couple posts before me, I'd certainly love a revisit of MTW with the new engine and more options. I'd also be extremely interested in Chinese history.

[munrock]

When does it not suck to be a peasant???
Well, it sucks less when you receive so many 'benefits' that you don't have to work, rather than having to work and paying 50% tax or being conscripted or pressed into the military.

[Kommodus]

The idea of a Total War game based in ancient China sounds great to me. Chinese armies tended to be a lot larger than those found in Europe, Japan, or pretty much anywhere else. Besides, I'm sure China has an equally interesting military history; it's just not quite as well known to us westerners. :bow:

[Lord Ovaat]

Actually, I'd kinda like to see a return to MTW using the new engine, but this time extend an additional period to include the Thirty Years War. At least with the religious bickerings during that period, you could pick a Christian faction that could tell the POPE to stick-it whenever he threatened you with excommunication or inquisitors. Yeah, I'd like that. http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/grinser/grinning-smiley-004.gif

[HicRic]

*unfurls his personal banner*

I want STW2!

Although perhaps it would be nicer to do a new period rather than re-visit an old one. I'd find a three-kingdoms China game interesting.

[Sociopsychoactive]

What about America: Total war?

I'm not a fan of muskets myself, infact I' not a fan of gunpowder stuff at all really, swords and bows are so much more fun, but if you go from colonisation to independance (with an option to continue). There are many, many sides to play, not just the english, french, spanish, dutch, but the natives have a great time of it to, aztecs and inca's (i want some aztec pyramids, then be able to sacrifice 10,000 slaves ontop of it) being the biggest but there are dozens of other tribes to play.

You also have the option of an interesting starting setup, slightly Mongol invasion like, for the europeans. You get a boatload of troops and aim west....

Much of the america's would count as rebel, much smaller native tribes for the most part and even some completely un-inhabited lands, and you have constant wars with the other colonials as you all struggle for land and power. Anyone who ever played sid miers excelent 'Colonisation' will probably agree. Then you have the brilliant end of declaring independance and fighting your home country for the europenas, and I don't know, kicking the europeans out completely might be good for the natives.

Thoughts?

[eadeater]

I think that although the concept of a Chinese total war sounds very interesting, a sort of Greece Total War would probably be more varied, especially if the time periods are errrr, altered somewhat ~D you could have all sorts of ancient nations together - different Greek city states, Troy, the Persians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians etc. Possibly a bit historically inaccurate for the Total War series, but potentially very fun.

[Nerouin]

How about Rome: Total War? We could use a completely new Total WarTM engine using innovative technology and groundbreaking design to bring the world of ancient Rome to life to deliver the biggest and most cinematic battles ever seen in a videogame. So the battles in Rome: Total War will maintain the epic scale that fans of Total WarTM " are used to, but will use high-detailed 3D polygonal troops and allows huge cities to be displayed on the battlefields. The result will be truly spectacular.

Oh no, wait. Could I have said that two years ago? Tee hee.


Anyway, my vote would be for the time period between the fall of Constantinople and the advent of vehicular technology.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Of course, the rumor is MTW2.

But that is just a rumor. Please don't shoot the rumor-guy. ~:p

I would like MTW2. Since MTW is my favorite game (at least currently ~;) ) an improved version should be really nice.

America: Total War - I'd take over the world... with New Jersey! ~D

Of course, I would probably like just about any Total Wars... unless CA gets bought by EA or something...

[Sir Toma of Spain]

After reading all of the stuff you guys have said, I love them all, especially the chinese one ~:)

[JR-]

After reading all of the stuff you guys have said, I love them all, especially the chinese one ~:)

i would like a Wheel of Time: Total War based on Robert Jordans IP.

but i would be equally happy with a World: Total War, or an expanded (in both time and geography) Medieval:Total War2.

[Kali]

~D MTW:2,
Or Far Eastern/Oriental:Medieval total war. Either would do a combination of the two could be intresting.
MTW:2 's my first wish though. One thing that bugs me is the facless nature of many of the units in MTW. By simply adding to the units title, its province of origin, Longbowmen could become The Longbowmen of Chester or Chivallric Knights become The knights of Bourbon etc etc without having to increase the unit slots.
Be nice to have a greater number and more historically correct provinces. Plus seasons rather than years, with more possible campaign startpoints, that drop you into specific historical or/and randomly created situations. That way we can play certain parts of history at a more detailed tactical, strategic and logistic level. i.e you could choose to start with the English at the begining Owen Glendowers revolt and concentrate on that series of campaigns. Or the French during the Albigensian Crusades etc etc. Essentially I want the Glorious achievments concept expanding. Total and Almost Total: domination is too unrealistic for me.
Friendly provinces should be accessible for troop movement. Maybe the negotiation of this is another role for emissaries. And perhaps you should be able to request aid from your allies. Rome:TW will no doubt address some of these issues so its probably already happening. I could keep on with my wish list but..........as long as its moddable we should be able to sort something out.
~:wave:

[Oaty]

I've seen this thread a dozen times and the winner is China Total war. Coming in at a close second would be Napoleonic Total and my guess for the latter one the expansion would be the U.S. civil war as it is not a popular choice but probably in the top 10

[Soulfly]

I wouldn't mind seeing World: Total War, but the problem would be deciding what factions to put in the game. There's literally hundreds to choose from (and don't forget the time period). And I think unless they made the map gigantic, it may probably seem a bit cramped.

Maybe use something like the Rise of Nations campaign map, though I havent played the game in so long, I forget the details of it.

[Morgan Frydman]

My favourites, in order:

1) Napoleanic Total War - I'd love to play large formations of musketeers and make them change into "line" and "square" and that sort of stuff. And there could be cool navel engagements as well, where you can actually see the battle and play it, not just a sign "sea battle over : you lost, loser". I'm thinking Trafalgar here.

And you could have elite units like Sean Bean!

And you could play a whole assortment of factions; British, French, Prussian, Russian, Ottoman, Egyptian (Napolean invaded Egypt), Dutch, Swedish, Polish, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Swiss and probably some more.

2) China Total War - I don't know much about Chinese history, but this could be a good idea. I bet they had some really great weaponry, outmatching any Medieval European weapons.

And maybe you could have Elite Shaolin Monks as units. That would be cool.

3) Ancient Total War - I think ancient mesopotamia and Egypt would be great fun to play in.

4) American Civil War Total War - sounds quite good but you can only be 2 sides. Maybe you could be native americans or something.

5) Medieval Total War 2 - I think I'd get bored with it, unless its radically different. Adding a few new provinces and new units won't cut it.

A map of Europe Middle East, North Africa, Persia, Central Asia would be cool, then you could play Abbasids, Persians among others. I'd love to invade Europe with a Persian army.

[LegionnaireX]

I believe somone from Gamestar said that they were planning to make a remake of Medieval. Don't know how accurate or trustable this is though.

[eeyoredragon]

There's so many options to choose from! But out of those already mentioned, I'd chose a China: Total War over a MTW2. This is because MTW2 seems more like a possible mod to RTW, with better units, provinces etc etc, than a new game, or an expansion pack. It wouldn't be something "new", just better, and I'd get bored pretty quick. ~:cool:

[william the bastard]

1) ancient total wars
2) dark ages total wars
~:santa:
only hope for games with compatibity :saint:

[Longshanks]

Personally I think taking on the Three Kingdoms period of Chinese history would be a step backward. In many ways it would be similar to STW, since the theme of the game is a civil war, with all factions having pretty much the same types of troops.

I'm much rather see the Total War series take on the Napoleonic Wars.

[Sociopsychoactive]

I may sound like a bit of a preacher here, but theres a hell of a lot more than two sides to America:Total War.

First of all theres at least four colonising factions, french, english, spanish and dutch (they did, just not much) and maybe others, there are maybe a hundred native tribes, at least a dozen that were big enough to constitute a major faction, there were wars aplenty between all sides (even native Vs Native) and thats most of the historical basis you need all set out. For those who prefer MTW style combat play the natives and have axes, swords, bows arrow and the like, for those of you who like muskets and dragoons, aswell as swordsmen, then the europeans are there, and when you have set up enough colonies (going RTW style on cities) and persueded them to rebel you try and declare your independance, after kicking out all the other colonising europeans of course. Also probably having a set date you have to reach before you can. Once you do that think of when you hit 60% in medieval, MASS REVOLT!

Half the colonies pledge loyal support, half the rest revolt against you and go imperial, on top of that the imperials arrive and aim to kill you. But don;t fret! You can buy troops from the defeated europeans to bolster your enemies, spring amazing ambushes with the aid of the natives, fight real sea battles against decent cannon boats and so on and so on.

For the natives you could try your best to resist christianity, burn down missions and war with europenas, buy muskets and learn the new ways of war or stick to what you know and use ambushes and native knowledge (attack while theyre stuck in a swamp for example). Either aim for total domination (kick out the europeans and 'unite' the tribes) or let them try and declare independace and then aid either side in the coming battles untill one side wins out.

It has been badly done so many times (American conquest, that was rubbish) but it has all the necessary historical requirements that it could even be done with the RTW engine, as far as we know of it yet.

Infact, I have an idea. To all you modders just waiting to leap on RTW like a pack of rabid dogs, make me an american mod! I know it;s a bit much to ask, the changing of the map completely would be the hardest part and may be litterally impossible, but I think it would be a decent game.

[DthB4Dishonour]

Ahhh, my good friends....some say the want shrimp some say steak.......I why not surf and turf ~:joker: . While i like many of the ideas stated above I do agree that a China TW would be a bit limited in terms of Unit Variety. The same could be said for a remake of STW.

I say we take 1 step back and 2 leaps forward. How about a call back to STW with a larger scope. This could be the original STW type with more detail etc.... but with a larger map that would include the rest of Asia i.e. China, Korea etc... The different playable factions could be chinese, mongolians, koreans, japanese.......perhaps include Inda aswell so we can cover a large scope of the East. This would allow for a huge variety in units and interesting factions as China, Japan and India could be fragmented at begining. Chinese chariots, Inidan War elephants, Mongolian Cavalry.

I personally loved STW and would love to see it redone with the new RTW engine. I do like the other ideas including Napoleonic TW which has the possibilty of having and American Civil war Expansion pack The Napoleonic TW could have the whole Colonization of Africa and Americas which can have minor factions such as Zulus and Native American Tribes.

[JR-]

My favourites, in order:

And you could have elite units like Sean Bean!

god no! have you ever read the books? sean bean was the worst cast character ever to play the part of Sharpe.

[JR-]

i still like the idea of a Medieval Total War 2 but expanded to cover the whole of eurasia, after all the Mongols plagued the Chinese and Japanese as well as Europe and the Middle east.

[Oaty]

I have to disagree with the people saying that China would suck with only a few units to chose from and some copmparing it to have the same few choices that STW did. Someone did a unit post for China and listed all the units just for 1 time period and the list was just staggering. Each region had specialty units that no other region had.

So before you go saying China was so lame for so few unit choices you need to rethink and do the research. I would'nt be surprised if they could easily have over 100 units for 1 time period and many more if you add in over the course of the periods and still have the historical nitpickers complaininng because they left so much out.

Same as Shogun in laments terms STW was just generic representation of Japan. For 1 thing they made the units generic 1 was for the game engine and 2 was they did'nt have the resources for such a complicated game(it takes money and time to do research and considering it was the first in its genre I can understand they did'nt want to put a heavy amount of resources into such a game and find out it's a bomb)

[Morgan Frydman]

god no! have you ever read the books? sean bean was the worst cast character ever to play the part of Sharpe.

No, I never got round to reading them. Though I have a few of the episodes on video. I thought they were pretty good. If Napolean Total War gets made I say Sean Bean should do the voice. ~:)

[Cataphract_Of_The_City]

What i would like to see is CA using this community,their excellent mods and RTWs graphic engine to create a huge and historically accurate TW that speads from the bronze ages to the napoleonic wars, with the map gradually expanding. Too much? ~D

[King Edward]

No, I never got round to reading them. Though I have a few of the episodes on video. I thought they were pretty good. If Napolean Total War gets made I say Sean Bean should do the voice. ~:)


Sean Bean was good in Sharpe but as said was not the best cast man to play the part, as per the books.

Sharpe was Borne in Wapping (London) not yorkshire as Sean Beans accent is. And he was tall and had dark hair. he also had a large scar down one cheek.

I He Served in the 33rd (Havercakes) Regiment in a India and Saved Wellington At Assay not in France as he does in the TV Series.

Other than those small diferences both the Books and the TV Series are fantastic.

[Barcid]

With sweeping titles like Medieval and Rome Total War they are going to need something big so Napoleonic Total War seems to make sense for the next title even if Asian Total War would be of more interest to me. At least with the latter they could re-introduce the Japanese so that we can have STW 2 with the new game engine. The only other possibility would be a sort of European Total War or Age of Reason Total War encompassing all the religious and expansionist wars of the 17th & 18th century.

[Mayfield The Conqueror]

I also would love to see a China:Total War, with the Three Kingdoms period as the focus of it as it would be very close to the technology involved in Medieval and Rome TW, and it would be very VERY interesting to have the generals be based upon the historical figures of the time. Having Lu Bu vs Zhang Fei on the battlefield (just like the KOEI games :) ) would be truly enjoyable.

[WarHawk]

A lot of these suggestions could be done in mods for RTW. ~;) I look forward to a Napoleonic Wars, and Star Wars mods the most.

[tommh]

Neither China, nor another area I'd like to see covered, India, have enough mass recognition or appeal to merit a treatment. Activison would never sign off on it. Romance of the Three Kingdoms has never moved any kind of units in the US or Europe and "Emperor" the city building game was a dismal failure.

Their are only a few areas that are going to be considered accessable enough. MTW again is of course possible. Something set in America is also a possibility, maybe covering 1600-1900 ? This would cover the French and Indian wars, the revolutionary war, the whiskey rebelion, the war of 1812, the Indian wars, the Texas war of independence, the Mexican American war, and finally the Civil war. If it stretched to South America it could include the Spainish colonisation and then the various indepence movements.

Not too many other possibilities. Napoleonics is borderline, which is a pity. It's just not main stream enough.

[Stoic]

I would love STW2 but not just a sequel, it would expand the whole campaign map and factions, you could play as the mongols, chinese as well as japan and any other decent sized people that existed at that time.

[exarchi]

WW2: Total War
Napoleonic would be plain boring. This age didn't utilize any real tactics on the battlefield. Men just stood there while manouvering.

[danimal]

Fantasy Total War is the only place left to go.

MTW is done - potential for better siedes though

STW is done, please see above

China Total War = Rubbish STW (no samurai)

America Total War is quite possibly the single most rubbish idea since chocolate exhaust pipes, they get their mits into too much already without making them think they have a history worth commenting on. ~:joker:

Mongol Total War a possibility

The real crowd puller would be a LOTR style Total War and the great thing about that is no historical rules, The scope for mods would be limitless and the campaign map could be truly outrageous. ~:cheers:

[danimal]

meant to say sieges not siedes :bow:

[King Edward]

Why not a Today total war? the amount of conflicts round the world currently going on mean no shortage of battles.

The scope for diplomacy would be massive, which always seems to be a big factor in peoples enjoyment of the campagne element of the game.

It would differ in that its not so much about conquest but you acting as the head of state of any country you like in the world, and dictate foreign policy as you see fit.

[Morgan Frydman]

Why not a Today total war? the amount of conflicts round the world currently going on mean no shortage of battles.

I don't think that would work. Strategically it would be good, i.e. big strategy maps and spies and industrial espionage and stuff. But the tactical side of it, the battles, wouldn't work. There are no set piece battles (or very few, anyway) in the world. Its all guerillas, terrorists, cruise missiles and small scale incursions. So a modern day Total War might as well be called Civilization 4.


The scope for diplomacy would be massive, which always seems to be a big factor in peoples enjoyment of the campagne element of the game.

It would differ in that its not so much about conquest but you acting as the head of state of any country you like in the world, and dictate foreign policy as you see fit.

No offence but that sounds completely boring. Might as well just read a newspaper.

[King Edward]

Is that not a bit like saying MTW is boring, might as well read a history book???

I think there is scope for a game such as i suggested although the more i think about it the less it suits the Total war aspect but the principle of Strat map and Real time battles in the modern era is appealing to me

[Akka]

A MTW2 would be very interesting, if they put in a good amount of details, diplomacy and commerce.

I would really like to see a Fantasy Total War, too. But the slippery part is that it should be both realistic enough to carry the "Total War" feeling, and at the same time allows for fantastic units and powers. I'm VERY afraid that a FTW would simply becomes arcade, particularly when the trend start to show its ugly head so much in RTW...

[danimal]

Fantasy Total War, you heard it here first folks :director:

[Essex_Cohort]

Without doubt, it has to be the American Cival war!!

Total Cival War ~:cheers:

[Unseen Potato]

The American Civil War and The Napoleon War wouldnt work. There would have been very little units to choose from(infantry, cavalry, cannons, elite infantry, dragoons), and all the factions would have very similar units (The only diffrence between the armies I can think of is the colour).

The Worldwars and the modern warfare is also bad idees, because the total war real time battles nees large, tight formations of men to work( it would be impossible to control a WW2 battle, with all the little units)

What I would like to see is Fantasy: total war. Maybe based on the Warhammer world ( the tabletop game, if anyone`s heard of it). A big, exciting map, a large varity of races and creatures, enourmes cities and no historical facts to care about. It would be PERFECT!!

But if Rome: total war turns out to be a sucess, I think Activision will make a expansion, where they include atilla the hun and the fall of Rome or something.

[Essex_Cohort]

You paint a very negative approach, but i think it would be good, if even, only a RTW mod. Now, where did i put that potato peeler ?........ ~:joker:

[danimal]

The American Civil War and The Napoleon War wouldnt work. There would have been very little units to choose from(infantry, cavalry, cannons, elite infantry, dragoons), and all the factions would have very similar units (The only diffrence between the armies I can think of is the colour).

The Worldwars and the modern warfare is also bad idees, because the total war real time battles nees large, tight formations of men to work( it would be impossible to control a WW2 battle, with all the little units)

What I would like to see is Fantasy: total war. Maybe based on the Warhammer world ( the tabletop game, if anyone`s heard of it). A big, exciting map, a large varity of races and creatures, enourmes cities and no historical facts to care about. It would be PERFECT!!

It is not often that a nail gets so truly hit upon it's head

Warhammer, what a truly quality game. The basic dynamics are all here for FTW. We all know orcs are green, stupid and strong, elves are fast, great archers and live in the woods and so on. Bring it on.

Oh and everyone please stop these ridiculous comments involving modern warfare and the total war engine, this includes all napoleaonic *spelling* and american wars.

[Essex_Cohort]

So sorry, in future we will e-mail our posts for your approval prior to posting. Heaven forbib we have our own thoughts, when yours are so correct. ~:joker:

[danimal]

Excellent, as long as thats established.

Seriously though - an intersesting thread completely peppered with ideas that the engine just isn't built for.

I know lets have cheesecake total war, where 10,000 men all sit round a table and eat cheesecake using the total war engine.

[Debaser85]

I can't see any Total Wars set in modern times working. Warfare has changed so radically. You couldn't have the epic battles that the Total War series is famous for, and keep the realism.

Infantry tactics have changed beyond recognition. You don't move units made of hundreds of men around the battlefield, they are split into small groups of mixed unit fire teams who scurry around the battlefield doing their best to avoid heavy armour and just direct air and artillery strikes, then moving in once the area is clear. How is the player going to direct dozens, maybe hundreds of fire teams around a map, while simultaneously directing artillery, tanks and aircraft?

Heavy armoured units don't move in blocks of a hundred either. They are spread out over miles of ground, are we the player going to have to click and move every single one? What about the battles like Kursk with thousands of tanks? even if that was scaled down to just a few hundred tanks on each side it would be far too difficult, as it would require having to control each one.

Games like Sudden Strike got round this by only having relatively small battles with rarely more than a dozen tanks. It was never two huge armies meeting each other! If the game is to live up to its 'Total War' tag with a campaign map where you coordinate entire armies, then that's what it would have do, and entire armies facing off against each other is impossible!


My own preference would be either MTW2 or a Napoleonic TW.

[Essex_Cohort]

Well said, so we will draw the line at the American Cival War, and not beynd ~:cheers:

[Mayfield The Conqueror]

Neither China, nor another area I'd like to see covered, India, have enough mass recognition or appeal to merit a treatment. Activison would never sign off on it. Romance of the Three Kingdoms has never moved any kind of units in the US or Europe and "Emperor" the city building game was a dismal failure.

If they were such a failure then why did KOEI keep making english ports for it for the SEGA GENESIS, Playstation, and Super Nintendo?? Because they enjoyed losing money?? I think the Playstation is up to ROT3K iteration 7 now.

And if we are talking about sales what Napoleonic era or civil war game has EVER moved any units??

[Unseen Potato]

Well said, so we will draw the line at the American Cival War, and not beynd ~:cheers:

I dont think Activision even will consider the American civalwar. It would have been an incredible dull game.

There would only be three diffrent base units.Cavalry, Infantry and artilliry. The only variation would be units armed with diffrent weapons. pluss that it would only be 2 playable factions, that were very similar to eachother (It was Americans fighting Americans you know)

And the War lasted just for 4 years. I dont see How this is gonna work with the total war strategy map. The seasons would have to be VERY short, and the whole province thing wouldnt work.

And what would the name of the game be???? The American Cival War: total war???? ~:joker:

The American cival war as totalwar game is a stupid unrealistic idea.

A total war game Cant be based on a war. It has to be based on a Time period.

[Nobody You'd Know]

My votes, in order of preference:

1. Ancient Art of War: Total War
This could be a lot more than just China - include Korea, the Khmer, India, etc. And it could span a huge range of time, or not. I don't mind either way, but it would have a huge variety of units whether or not it was over a large period of time.

2. Medieval (or Dark Ages, for a different name): Total War
'Nuff said.

3. Napoleonic: Total War (1700s to 1800s)
This could work very well. Includes Napoleonic, American Revolution, American Civil War, lots of other wars... Many units would be musketeers, but you'd have different types of weapons, different tactics available (some standing in lines, some hiding like the Americans did in the Revolution). You'd have some cavalry. You'd have the infantry sometimes rushing with bayonets, and sometimes you'd have peasants with pitchforks, etc, or you'd have some elite units who used up their bullets and had sabers. You could incorporate more ship battles if you want more unit variety, and allow units to board ships.

[exarchi]

It's sad people haven't actually seen napoleonic era warfare in action in the few movies that showcase it... then they would understand how stupid it was :D

[danimal]

The winner - Done already

Second place - Done already

Third place - please see the many previous posts about how inappropriate this idea is .

I am gonna keep shouting it out ~:idea: Fantasy Total War ~:idea:

[DisruptorX]

3. Napoleonic: Total War (1700s to 1800s)
This could work very well. Includes Napoleonic, American Revolution, American Civil War, lots of other wars... Many units would be musketeers, but you'd have different types of weapons, different tactics available (some standing in lines, some hiding like the Americans did in the Revolution). You'd have some cavalry. You'd have the infantry sometimes rushing with bayonets, and sometimes you'd have peasants with pitchforks, etc, or you'd have some elite units who used up their bullets and had sabers. You could incorporate more ship battles if you want more unit variety, and allow units to board ships.

Although including the late 1800s would be a mistake. All of those nasty modern weapons used in WW1 were around in the late 1800s, there was just no big war to test them out in. Machineguns etc would completely ruin the total war regiment-based combat style.

I think that 1550-1850 would be a good timeframe.

[TheDuck]

I can't see any Total Wars set in modern times working. Warfare has changed so radically. You couldn't have the epic battles that the Total War series is famous for, and keep the realism.

Infantry tactics have changed beyond recognition. You don't move units made of hundreds of men around the battlefield, they are split into small groups of mixed unit fire teams who scurry around the battlefield doing their best to avoid heavy armour and just direct air and artillery strikes, then moving in once the area is clear. How is the player going to direct dozens, maybe hundreds of fire teams around a map, while simultaneously directing artillery, tanks and aircraft?

Heavy armoured units don't move in blocks of a hundred either. They are spread out over miles of ground, are we the player going to have to click and move every single one? What about the battles like Kursk with thousands of tanks? even if that was scaled down to just a few hundred tanks on each side it would be far too difficult, as it would require having to control each one.

Games like Sudden Strike got round this by only having relatively small battles with rarely more than a dozen tanks. It was never two huge armies meeting each other! If the game is to live up to its 'Total War' tag with a campaign map where you coordinate entire armies, then that's what it would have do, and entire armies facing off against each other is impossible!


My own preference would be either MTW2 or a Napoleonic TW.

Hmmm..

First.. tanks don't fight individually, they fight in fireteams.. and it seems like the TW engine does teams fairly well.

True.. infantry doesn't fight standing in straight lines anymore, but team cohesiveness at the platoon/squad level is very important to success.. so again.. we are talking teams.. not individuals.

Right now the engine doesn't have the concept of 'digging in'.. i.e. fighting from hand prepared defenses like foxholes and the like.. so that would have to be added to allow things to work well.

Modern infantry fights best from trees and cover.. these things are actually modeled in the engine, although I would argue that some things could be modeled better.

I don't think the engine is as 'off' as you make it seem. Modern armies still fight in teams, and maneuver as teams. And this is what is modeled in the TW engine.

Neat dressed lines and ranks? no. But teams, sure!

The major issue with the TW engine isn't that the warfare style can't be modeled, its the distances involved. Artillery fires over distances measured in multiple kilometers, modern armor engages at about 2 km, and modern infantry engages at about 1/2 km. So there is a vast array of equipment with very different engagement distances all cooperating. This would be a challenge in the TW engine, but I can see how to provide some of it.

To be honest, the RTS games that model armor warfare as individually moveable tanks has always seemed bogus to me. It might be fun from a game perspective, but it certainly doesn't match reality very well.

[Debaser85]

TheDuck, I'm not really saying that the RTW engine couldn't handle it, though it most probably couldn't, but rather that a game like this just couldn't be made along the same lines as STW, MTW and RTW. I'll try to explain myself better this time.

In these older battles which we simulate the entire army was packed in close together. Battle lines could stretch for a few miles and were very inflexible, everyone was facing the enemy, lined up and ready to just march forward. They would meet, fight and one side would win. Because of the time and difficulty in raising an army, the outcome of the battle could end the whole conlict itself. The victor could march into the capital city and declare it and the surrounding provinces his.


In comparison, WW2 was made up of tens of thousands of different engagements happening all over the world simultaneously. Unlike hundreds of years ago where moving soldiers and reinforcing armies was one hell of task, we could now do it in a matter of days, by plane or by ship. An army made up of 30,000 men a thousand years ago might be in a line a mile long, an army of 30,000 men now would be spread out over 30 miles - and that's a conservative estimate! Fighting could go on for days, weeks or even months with each side simply replacing their losses. See how this wouldn't work? Currently in Total War, we build up armies, march them into an enemy province, meet the enemy army, then either win or lose in the space of one battle. Nice and easy, but it wouldn't work in the modern era as wars just aren't fought like that.


Anyway what would the goal of modern, say WW2 Total War game be? Imperialism had ended, so what would the goal of the campaign be? I think it would be unrealistic to pick a nation and try to conquer the world with it.

Hopefully you get a better understanding of what I mean! ~:)

[Essex_Cohort]

Origionally posted by Unseen Potato
I dont think Activision even will consider the American civalwar. It would have been an incredible dull game.

There would only be three diffrent base units.Cavalry, Infantry and artilliry. The only variation would be units armed with diffrent weapons. pluss that it would only be 2 playable factions, that were very similar to eachother (It was Americans fighting Americans you know)

And the War lasted just for 4 years. I dont see How this is gonna work with the total war strategy map. The seasons would have to be VERY short, and the whole province thing wouldnt work.

And what would the name of the game be???? The American Cival War: total war????

The American cival war as totalwar game is a stupid unrealistic idea.

A total war game Cant be based on a war. It has to be based on a Time period.


I & many others enjoy the American Cival War, i only suggested it as it is something i enjoy so put it forward. And to be honest i couldnt care if you like it or not, it was just a suggestion, get over it ~:joker:

[Unseen Potato]

Okey

I like to go skiing. What about making skiing: total war???

[Oaty]

I know lets have a Flaming TotalWar where we just flame other patrons debating over what the next series should be.Then CA can have there laughs in over all the insults we gave them over the past 2 years. It does'nt matter what CA wants to make, its what Activision(less) will tell them to make and if they make anything else they do'nt get a paycheck. I feel that CA has very little say on what they produce and Activision(less) tells them what the For Unlawful Carnage to Knowledge to do. Just look at Viking Invasion they did'nt want horns on the Vikings helmits but what did Activision(less) make them do ---- dangit hollywoodize the game----- money money money. CA did we mention all we care about is ---- um let me think here money


CA " but ummm----" Activision " money "

CA " but um------" Activision " money"'

CA " but ummm----" Activision " money "

CA "let me get this right we should shove money up your donkey"

Activision " yes but watch your vocabulary "

CA " k you want money so you can get hot chicks even though you ca'nt serve the whole enchilada "

Activision " what does it matter to you we are still getting laid "

CA " so are we why do'nt you ask your wife "

Activision " shut-up and just get us more money so we can at least have our arrogance"

CA " ok we will get you your money...... and we will shut up and so will your wife so we can pretend life is all peaches and cherries.....


..... a long pause

This is total war (from that bald headed freak from MTW)




It does'nt matter what us fans want but it boils down to what the masses want .............


hmmm and for those historical nitpickers that say Gladiator was co0mplete BS

(welll let me try to rephrase a quote from that movie) (although I think I will buthcher it)

No he knows exactly what he is doing ........... please the mob and you have total(war) control of rome

(Unfamous qotes from oaty) Please the gamers and you have total(war) control of the market.

Well anyways I give STW an A+++ considering its time period (the game was developed and the resources they had) and MTW an A (Yes improved gameplay but it had some country music in ....... 1 step forward and 2 steps back)

And then RTW comes along with all theses great improvementsand yet failing in some perspectives. But what does that matter they are still appeasing the mob.

Oh sure they implement all these realistic features of ambush and all this other greatness but when the units are a max of 200( to me as far as it seems)---------- that ambush probably does'nt matter because if your forces hold long enough to allow the ambush it does'nt matter because thay are already routing and all they are doing is killing further competition against the empire(against you completing the game sooner) Where as realistic would be------ would your 10,000 peasants on that right flank hold off 10,000 professional soldiers on that flank to allow your ambush to sandwich them and eliminate any further resistance, or if they route kill all chances of success and your professional soldiers march off the filed to save there own butts.

Realistic would be huge units (wich so far CA or Activision has refused to implement) holding the line while hopefully your tactical maneuver is the decisive factor of wether you win or lose. I know theres been talk about cannae on how Hannibal did the impossible(and gamers would just love to reproduce this event) and if they programmed the game realistically this would actually be possible but MTW lacks the resources (wich I understand) and so does RTW but maybe they looked the wrong direction and went for graphics (Sorrry graphical designers your work is great but when it comes to war I do'nt care what the enemy looks like I want them fricken dead). War is war and whoever beat me to the signature it does'nt matter ----------war is not about who is right but who is left deserves a beer, heck I'm being cheap how about a years supply of it.

Anyways of course its just a video game and of course no matter how historically they make it does need some arcade style to it otherwise who wants to spend a real 3 days marching to a confrontation only to massacre the enemy. The point is I ONLY bought into the TotalWar series because I thought I would be commanding huge armies slaughtering barbarians( oh wait I'm a descendant of a barbarian tribe(OK just putting there barbarian tribes in place), while commanding huge armeis and actually having decisive factors in the battle ....... not my 1000 elite men slaughtered all your men and there reenforcements because this arcade game is so enjoyable....... I want all men on the battlefield holding out for reenforcements or running away so they can once again use there pitchforks to get hay imto the barn.


Anyways I do have to try out some of those competitor games wehre they seem to actually have tons of men on the battle field and maybe they actually hold off long enough for a major maneuver. Hmmm and some people actrually pick on those games because of there graphics..... Maybe RTW does have some competition...... but after playing the demo and seeing the "arcade units of no more than 200 men maybe RTW has hit the dumps for a few -------- hopefully I will find them more enjoyable and there will be a mor realistalicle feel to warfare....... yes I watched a games trailer that someone posted in the Colisseum but if its true to its trailer and the men do'nt walk and kill as fast as they do then i give it a big plus because i hate the factor of the pause button its a biog cheat that is thrown in that makes gamers feel they are gods because they made the A.I. that can give commands every 1 1 millionth of a second ./......... pleeeeeeease killllllllll that pause button because that kills the intensity and introduce battles where 1 decision could be the outcome wethir in your favour or not

Of course I will but RTW but when a game can sport 2-5000 men per unit and not make the whole game a battle of special units that are flanking each other., I will can the total war series because I'm too old to be playing arcade style ........ of course I got a good laugth at how I would beat my mom on nintendo because I had good eyehand coordination but I am past that now

[Papewaio]

Starcraft:TW
Warcraft:TotalWar
Lord of the Rings :TotalWar
DiabloII:TotalWar
SIMS:TotalWar... now there is a huge fanbase ready to buy anything!

[danimal]

George Bush - Total War

You get ten thousand diplomats on a battlefield all accusing each other of having weapons of mass destruction.

[kchickenlord]

Ancient total war: the romans were well documented but going to far back will result in too much guesswork for units and the like,
that said Neolithic:Total War has a ring to it!!

MTW 2:if the map was expanded to cover more of the world this could give the game a massive scope

Asian:TW: good idea, not just china, would be nice to cover more.

Mongol:TW: decent scope, good unit variety, MASSIVE units.

Napoleonic:TW: Firearms limit the game too much and if the battles are done well the game will be too boring for the casual gamer, time frame is short, unit variety not as large as any of above.

American:TW: As with Napolean but the time frame could be far longer, could start with the white invasion and onto the civil war, but the different wars would lack historical continuity if the gamer was given too much opportunity to change history, the civil war might not happen!
Has the advantage of appealing to the American market (which is all most publishers really care about) and it can be more authentic as theres no need to rape someone elses history and rewrite it for the benefit of the masses!!

WW2 and Modern:TW: get real, anyone pushing for this has zero understanding of the scales, formations and complexities of modern combined arms tactics, the unit TOEs themselves would make the game too complicated to make. Buy tacops or combat mission instead.

[Count Alfred von Schlieffen]

Sigh, all this war.... why don't we make a game called Total Peace? Yes! Like Hippie: Total Peace, or: Gandhi: Total Peace. You get to wage no war whatsoever, you don't invade someones provinces, you don't build military units. Instead, you love, as much as you can. You love the other factions. With love, you conquer the strategy map until it's a nice, pink colour. 'Battle' mode will consist of units hugging each other.

.....

What did I smoke today? ~:dizzy:

[lars573]

Napoleonic total war has been done as a mod for MTW (and RTW as soon as it's out). And anyone who says that musketry wouldn'd work in the total war style is just plain wrong. I have the mod and it's great, it's on version 3 with version 4 coming soon. Personally I like musketry better than swords and bows, when i heard that rome was the next total war game i was pissed. Really pissed i wanted them to keep going into the 16th century. After about a month and loads of game info later I calmed down. Now I'm phsyched for RTW, pre-ordered it and eveything.
Personally after rome I want them to do asian total war. That is a total war game who's map goes from where it ended in MTW to the pacific ocean. With persian, indian, chinese, mongol, korean, thai, khemer, viet, turkic, and japanese factions.

[Soulflame]

Well, I'd like anything with Dutch in it...:p.

LOTR;TW is already in the making, well.. sorta. It's LOTR;Battle for Middle Earth. It won't feature the diplomacy part I think.. can't see some guy from Rohan go to Isengard "Please stop making Uruk-Hai, you can marry Eowyn if you want!" hehe. But the battles might be the same.

Napoleon, China and America; TW all sound nice and might be ok.

I would really love a fantasy based TW. This also gives new challenges and 'wow' factor stuff, like the addition of flying units! Dragons and griffins... hmmm goodness.

But don't expect a new game in the series for a long time (save an expansion for RTW that is), I read in a press anouncement or something they are going for console games in the not so distant future...

[Essex_Cohort]

To be honest, i would just like my copy of RTW, i dont care what comes after ~D

[lars573]

^I hear you just another month ~:cheers:

[Maedhros]

LotR total war is in the works, but it'll suck. From what I've seen so far it looks like every other point and click game.

It isn't fit for TW anyway. As cool as the battles would be there were few factions, and few realms to choose. Every nation was in decline, their borders were shrinking not expanding, and the wars were relatively short.

Silmarillion..........

Massive scale, and a variety of units. Battles on a legendary scale and a war of scale and scope befitting the TW engine.

Think how much fun modders would have with flying units, and Balrogs (dread the "can balrogs fly debate")

Make for great visuals. The units, and landscapes would be an awesome sight.

[dancho]

Fall of Rome.

Somebody is doing a mod for MTW called "Fall of Rome TW," I know, but it would also make a great sequel to RTW. RTW covers the birth of the empire. Fall of Rome would include Vandals, Visigoths, Huns, Franks, Eastern and Western Empires, etc. It would rock most righteously. Who wants Maximus on the Rhine? Well, I do, for one!

You could decide the religion of the empire (like in Shogun TW)-- whether to "go christian" like Constantine or tough it out and stay pagan. You could replay the epic journey of the Visigoths as they marched from Germany to North Africa. Fight as Romanized Britons under Arthur, etc, etc. Ambush the legions in the German forests and grab yourself a handful of Eagles...

Oh my, I'm gettin' all excited.

:hide:

Be excellent to each other.

[King Azzole]

How about World: Total war? Could start in 300BC, and ending date circa 1600AD. The entire world would be the map, and it would start with all the factions that were in the world at that time. Of course lots of speculation in some areas would be needed, but I think a total war that covers the entire globe is needed. ;)

[kchickenlord]

romanised britons under arthur....... i think perhaps the total war series should go in a historical direction as opposed to a hollywood direction.

Gunpowder warfare is too boring for most players, it wont be made, personally i would love to see a total war game spanning from early matchlock hand gonnes to needle guns and chassepots in the early 1800s, and possibly up to the russian-japonese conflict, ww1 couldnt be covered though, and the maps would need to be much larger (but by the next game they probably will be ~:) .
the problem is to make it all go together seamlessly, im not sure it can be done, too much hopping between conflicts.

as a final note, id prefer to see any total war sequel based on valid history and not anything involving russel crowe, sean bean or brad pitt!

[JR-]

Eurasia: Total War

spanning 100BC to 1400AD

[JR-]

I would really like to see a Fantasy Total War, too. But the slippery part is that it should be both realistic enough to carry the "Total War" feeling, and at the same time allows for fantastic units and powers. I'm VERY afraid that a FTW would simply becomes arcade, particularly when the trend start to show its ugly head so much in RTW...

Robert Jordans Wheel of Time series.
~:cool:

[kchickenlord]

A total war game based on Irish,welsh,english,scottish,norse etc. etc. legends would be supremely interesting,
It would be fantasy but with real myth to add depth.

Only problem is it would take 20 years of study to fit all the myths together properly!

[dancho]

romanised britons under arthur....... i think perhaps the total war series should go in a historical direction as opposed to a hollywood direction ........as a final note, id prefer to see any total war sequel based on valid history and not anything involving russel crowe, sean bean or brad pitt!

It's too late!
~;)

[DisruptorX]

A total war game based on Irish,welsh,english,scottish,norse etc. etc. legends would be supremely interesting,
It would be fantasy but with real myth to add depth.

Only problem is it would take 20 years of study to fit all the myths together properly!

I don't think that would be the only problem. ~:) I think heroes like Cu Chulainn wading through enemy units and slaughtering them single handedly would rather unbalance the standard total war system. Mythology centers on warrior heroes who were the match of an entire regiment (or sometimes, army) of foes. I like the way that Total War focuses on the units, not the heroes.

[kchickenlord]

I agree, but my point is that it would be a better alternative to a fantasy total war, there would be something educational in it, im sure the engine is capable enoguh, and jedi generals wouldnt seem out of place!

Maybe we could just change to elephant model to cu chulainn ~D

[Morgan Frydman]

King Azzole:

How about World: Total war? Could start in 300BC, and ending date circa 1600AD.


Peregrine_Tergiversate:

Eurasia: Total War

spanning 100BC to 1400AD

*cough*Civilization*cough*

[Morgan Frydman]

Regarding Fantasy: Total War. Yeah it would be quite good, but I'm almost certain everyone who buys it is going to be dissappointed because we all have our idea of "cool" fantasy battles.
People will moan "Where's the orks?" and "These dragons don't breathe fire!", "how come some wizard is more powerful than my whole army?", "My ogre army doesn't look right!"..... ad nauseum.
This is because fantasy is just that, fantasy, and everyone will want the game to be how they percieve a fantasy world to be.

If they based it on some pre-made fantasy, ie LOTR, then it would work better. But, from what I've seen of LOTR there isn't that much variety of units, factions etc. Its all Orks with pikes and crappy swords, or riding wierd dog things. And on the human side it's 1 type of cavalry, crap archers and an assortment of militia types. And don't get me started on those tree people.
On the faction front it's either Gondor, Rohan or Mordor. I suppose you could play the game as hobbits, if you really wanted. But its a step backwards from Medieval, if anything.

I don't know many fantasy literature/movies. Does anyone know any other possible "worlds" to base Fantasy: TW on?

[Unseen Potato]

Yeah the wamhammer world( the tabletopgame) would be perfect for a total war game. It has it all. A large varity od races of creatures, and every race has its own fighting style. Large towns and huge, exciting map.

It would be PERFECT!!!!!

[JR-]

Regarding Fantasy: Total War. Yeah it would be quite good, but I'm almost certain everyone who buys it is going to be dissappointed because we all have our idea of "cool" fantasy battles.
People will moan "Where's the orks?" and "These dragons don't breathe fire!", "how come some wizard is more powerful than my whole army?", "My ogre army doesn't look right!"..... ad nauseum.
This is because fantasy is just that, fantasy, and everyone will want the game to be how they percieve a fantasy world to be.

If they based it on some pre-made fantasy, ie LOTR, then it would work better. But, from what I've seen of LOTR there isn't that much variety of units, factions etc. Its all Orks with pikes and crappy swords, or riding wierd dog things. And on the human side it's 1 type of cavalry, crap archers and an assortment of militia types. And don't get me started on those tree people.
On the faction front it's either Gondor, Rohan or Mordor. I suppose you could play the game as hobbits, if you really wanted. But its a step backwards from Medieval, if anything.

I don't know many fantasy literature/movies. Does anyone know any other possible "worlds" to base Fantasy: TW on?

Robert Jordans Wheel Of Time Fantasy World.................

www.dragonmount.com

[eeyoredragon]

Raymond E. Feists Midkemia could work as well. But LOTR would sell more. People buy what they know, and LOTR is a lot more mainstream than Robert Jordans and Raymond E. Feists worlds. Together.

[sunsmountain]

Nice idea, that Fantasy Total War. Did you know CA considered it when they went with Rome:TW instead? It's in one of the developer diaries if you don't believe me.

Anyway, this topic has been discussed to death in many forums, a quick summary shows you:

1 - Napoleon/US civil war
2 - Fantasy/LOTR total war
3 - Remake Shogun (including mongol) & Medieval (including viking)
4 - Expansion for Rome:
* Alexander the Great's campaign
* The Huns invasion

5 - miscellaneous: Caveman (crazy), Ancient (Hittites, Assyrians, etc.), Egypt, Africa, China (boring), LOTR mod (will be done and will suck, no Nazghul), etc.

1 & 2 would require a new Engine (muskets, flying units), CA can do this for their revolutionary game-path.
Musket age: Easy to get history, difficult to get different troops.
Fantasy age: Hard to get history, easy to get different troops.
*note: Atlantis contains some history and also comes very close to fantasy...

3 & 4 would require a simple evolutionary mod of Rome:TW, like CA have done for Shogun (mongol invasion) and Medieval (viking invasion). It is likely that the modding community will have a BIG influence in this decision, if 'professional' modders re-create Medieval:TW, why would they waste the effort?

I hope, however, that the modders will stick to Alexander & the Huns, while CA works on remaking Medieval/Shogun. They will always be the best modders themselves, of course.
It's also easier to skin units to look like 400 BC Macedonian Greeks and 400AD Huns, than it is to create new units like Feudal Men At Arms in glorious 3D (much more difficult/work than you think).

[JR-]

Raymond E. Feists Midkemia could work as well. But LOTR would sell more. People buy what they know, and LOTR is a lot more mainstream than Robert Jordans and Raymond E. Feists worlds. Together.

agreed, that Midkemia would be good.

i have just found that some fine fellow is making a Wheel of Time mod for Medieval. check it out in the dungeon forum.

[hotingzilla]

Think about Star Wars Total War.
CLonetroopers.... Jedi, Wookies... kinda cool.

[JR-]

Nice idea, that Fantasy Total War. Did you know CA considered it when they went with Rome:TW instead? It's in one of the developer diaries if you don't believe me.

2 - Fantasy/LOTR total war

Fantasy age: Hard to get history, easy to get different troops.
*note: Atlantis contains some history and also comes very close to fantasy...


Wheel of Time has an extremely detailed history that spans thousands of years thus providing plenty of background for alliances, past wars etc.

[kchickenlord]

How about Christmas Shopping:Total War

You must lead an army of highly strung parents through the urban warzones of the christmas period (circa Oct 1st - Dec 20th) in a quest to buy little johnny his action ninja with realistic battlesounds (tm) while defeating rival armies looking to purchase the same item at a toyshop that didnt have the foresight to order enough for the christmas rush.

Might be too stressful to play......

[angelofdarkness]

As with all Total War games to date there was always an expansion pack. For a Rome expansion pack l would vote for a Greek cities expansion. The units wouldn't be so much like Medieval were you have hunderds of units but in my own view Shogun that had fewer units was more fun.
We could have the Greek cities waging war that is quite intersting and we could also have some very nice historical campaigns. Some first player missions like Alexander's conquests or the wars against the Persians and the long lasting war between Athens and Sparta.

For the new game in Total War l should add for a fantasy game. LOTR style battles would be quite nice to watch. Imagine a game like LOTR with Middle Earth as the map and the factions u could use to play the game. U could conquer regions and stuff like that and there wouldn't be any bountries as far as history.

[Sir Toma of Spain]

Once again i am amazed at all of the ideas everyone has thought of but here are my thoughts

I rekon a Fantasy: Total War would be great ( based on the warhammer game) and a world total war which would be so much bigger and have a larger variety of factions. I belive both of these are doable

[Quietus]

Gamespot News: September 22, 2007

The Creative Assembly and Maxis has recently announced development of SIMS: Total War. In an effort to corner the PC market that has dwindled due to Console encroachments, the two companies have joined efforts to bring forth what is termed a“TB-RTS-FPS-Simulation” game. We caught up with Ian Roxburgh of the CA for an exclusive Gamespot interview.

Gamespot: Tell us about this new, exciting game.
IR: This is our new venture with Maxis that will revolutionize the Total War and SIMs series in one stroke. It is a natural evolution in gaming.

Gamespot: I see, now the hardcore – diehard, if you will – fans of RTW might say this could ruin the RTS-feel of the game. How do you respond?
IR: Not at all. Players have really yearned for that reality type of gaming. Being a fan of Reality genre – Simon Cowell and the likes – myself, we wanted to the players to be immersed in reality, such as in Survivor, Fear Factor, Amazing Race, the Apprentice and even American Idol.

Gamespot: Reality that is familiar with the players.
IR: Most definitely. We even made the gameplay so simple that you don’t have to go through the tutorial and play as is out of the box.

Gamespot: Interesting…and a welcome change….
IR: Even babies can play it.

Gamespot: How so?
:::Ian Roxburgh puts a baby in front of the computer. Baby grabs the mouse and start pounding on the keyboard. Units go on formation, fight, computer blinks. Baby wins::::

Gamespot: How did the baby do that???
IR: Simple. The software recognizes random pounding on the keyboard. Units turn into superheroes, AI takes over and win the game.

Gamespot: What kind of superheroes are we dealing with?
IR: Depends on the mode you’re in.

Gamespot: Oooh, that’s what that was, another new feature. What’s Harry Potter mode?
IR: Units turn into magicians.

Gamespot: Spy Kids mode?
IR: Units use unconventional high-tech gadgets.

Gamespot: Matlock mode?
IR: Those are for older folks. Units turn to old superslueth, that are deceptively smart.

Gamespot: The tactical possibilities are dizzying. Much more varied than the past.
IR: Most definitely. Players can even accessorize their units with weapons, cash, cars, cell phones and bling-bling.

Gamespot: The game has gone very personal.
IR: On many levels, it does. In the Urban and suburban jungle anything can happen and it’s all real.

Gamespot: Well, it is a pleasure hearing from you. We’ll be looking for further peeks at this magnificent game.
IR: Thank you. And btw, we are already making the expansion Sims: Total War Riot Invasion. With new faction leaders like Union Boss, Religious Zealot, Environmental Activist, Celebrity Politician, Disgruntled Postal Employee, Hip-hop Gangbanger and Punk singer. Not to mention you can play historical riots in Tiananmen Square and the LA riots after the Rodney King trial.~ ~ ~


If the Total War Series stays true to its roots and continue to innovate. I want Ancient China: Total War.

[Colovion]

Yeah the wamhammer world( the tabletopgame) would be perfect for a total war game. It has it all. A large varity od races of creatures, and every race has its own fighting style. Large towns and huge, exciting map.

It would be PERFECT!!!!!

There's already a game about that coming out.

[DisruptorX]

If the Total War Series stays true to its roots and continue to innovate. I want Ancient China: Total War.

That would be great. After Playing Dynasty Warriors 2/3, I actually went out and read the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and think that it would make an awesome strategy game. Of course, thats just one piece of Chinese history, there is so much potential to make a great game from any timeframe. I personally find the Chinese history to be much more fascinating than the introverted Japanese.

[Crazy Breton]

I would like to see them make a Middle Earth: Total War. Choose between the various races. That would be ideal.

[Soulflame]

There's already a game about that coming out.

Do you mean the one coming this fall? I can't remember the exact name, but at least it's about Warhammer 40k, which (although a real innovation) wouldn't give me the 'oemph' that normal Warhammer gives (which is more fantasy like). Second, I saw some footage, it uses individual units (not squads) and is INCREDABLY fast-paced. In short, it's a futuristic RTS.

So a TW game based on Warhammer (or even Warhammer 40k) would be very different.

[Crazy Breton]

ThErE NeEdS To Be A MiDdLe EaRtH ToTaL wAr. But not until they come out for an expansion for RTW.

[Shoraro]

Do you mean the one coming this fall? I can't remember the exact name, but at least it's about Warhammer 40k, which (although a real innovation) wouldn't give me the 'oemph' that normal Warhammer gives (which is more fantasy like). Second, I saw some footage, it uses individual units (not squads) and is INCREDABLY fast-paced. In short, it's a futuristic RTS.

So a TW game based on Warhammer (or even Warhammer 40k) would be very different.

That would be Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War. It is fast-paced, but manages to be pretty tactical too (I've played the beta).

As to Warhammer, it would be perfect for the RTW engine. All the armies are already well defined, so the only major additions would be flying units & magic.

Of course, this all depends on who has the rights, but we can all dream, right?

[Ja'chyra]

ThErE NeEdS To Be A MiDdLe EaRtH ToTaL wAr. But not until they come out for an expansion for RTW.

Is there something wrong with you caps lock?

I would go with the fantasy:TW I know a lot of people here wouldn't like it but I would.

[Unseen Potato]

[
B]Second, I saw some footage, it uses individual units (not squads) and is INCREDABLY fast-paced. In short, it's a futuristic Rts.[/B]

What you have seen must have be middenheim, another gamesworkshop game. The warhammer I am talking about is the original, fantasy wargame with big armies with lots of regiments clashing on the battlefield. Its very similar to the the total war series.

[maestro]

How about "Old Testament: Total War"? Huh?

You could have the Israelites leaving Egypt and conquering the promised land, fighting off all of teh neighbouring tribes (and there were many) followed by expansion of the map through time to incorporate the up and coming empires of the Babylonians (Nebuchadnezzar), the Medo-Persian Empire (Darius and Cyrus), the Greek Empire (Alexander) and finally the the Roman Empire (Caesar).

Maybe it's a little staid to centre it around palestine but you could.....

I think that 1500BC to the year 0 would be a great era to do for a war sim :jumping:

(You could even have a phillistine hero called Goliath, an Israelite hero called Samson etc.)

[maestro]

That would be Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War. It is fast-paced, but manages to be pretty tactical too (I've played the beta).

As to Warhammer, it would be perfect for the RTW engine. All the armies are already well defined, so the only major additions would be flying units & magic.

Of course, this all depends on who has the rights, but we can all dream, right?


I think you're right about the Total War engine being fab for Warhammer, or 40k, but I think Dawn of War is pants - it's just Command and Conquer with Terminators.

[Dux Syagrius]

I think Europe TW 1453-1700's would be interesting. You could transcend from the time of the Itallian condeterri (combined arms) to the rise of gunpowder to the time when gunpowder reigned supreme. There are many interesting scenarios that could be played out like what if the Ottomans had not ossified? Could the Habsburgs have won it all? What about the united crowns of France and Spain under the Bourbons? The only thing that would be missing is colonization of the new world...

[Samurai Waki]

I'd personally like to see an STW 2 or what I think would be even cooler is an imperialistic Total War, covering all of the european factions, India, Africa, Americas, the Far East the entire world as a matter of fact and each faction actually does what it was supposed to do from 1492-1880s, like the rennaissance could be going on in europe, european nations could trade and conquest americas and african nations, whilst the senguoku period in Japan happens and all the various clans fight each other and each country starts out in a certain time period, all the european, American, and African nations start out in 1492 and you start from there, or if you play Japan you start out in the early 1500s as one of the clans and fight for control of Japan, once you conquer all of Japan or whatever then you could start to affect the rest of the world as well, technology changes would be drastic depending on each nation and how you as a leader exploits it, if you control America then you'd better be ready for the American revolution and fight as either the Americans or the occupying force...it would be complicated but if you hammered out all of the details and had everything organized it could be done. that would be cool

[Arcadius]

I would LOVE to see a good Napoleonic game using the TW engine. I've always meant to try the MTW mod that allowed this.

Arcadius
www.houseofjulii.com

[Adrian II]

Morgan, interesting topic. I think first of all any future TW game should have unity of place, time and action along the lines of ancient Greek tragedy. Meaning that the game's narrative development ("story line" if you want) would actually make sense. By implication it should have a coherent and manageable map, a time span that makes sense, a restricted number of recognizable goals, etcetera. The idea of including two distinct story lines in MTW, i.e. Glorious Achievements and Domination, is brilliant, but the developers sadly missed their own point by boiling down GA to essentially military goals. For instance it would have made a lot of difference if, say, acumen weighed in on the battlefield and commanders with better education (as a result of your building universities) and wordly knowledge (through discovery of other parts of Europa) commanding less superstitious troops (result of stamping out zeal, developing science) would do better than others.

Anyway, most periods and episodes suggested above, ranging from ancient Persia through the American Civil War, would meet these "tragic" requirements. A second condition would be more or less equal, though markedly different starting positions for at least three different playable parties or factions. STW, MTW and RTW (apparently) all eminently qualify here, but you would run into trouble with, say, a pre-Columbian game where your Azteks and other native peoples were virtually helpless in the face of Spanish conquest apart from a brief initial period. The American Civ essentially counted two parties, but it would probably make up for that shortcoming by providing some terrific "3-fold unity" fun.

All in all, I would probably go for the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period, preferably with a naval expansion to include anything from the French and Indian Wars through Chesapeake and Trafalgar (1805). The added benefit would be that such a game would appeal to a whole new segment of strat game addicts and history buffs who've been out there since the first board games such as Wooden Ships & Iron Men were first produced, i.e. the 1970's. I'd say bring them in, but slowly, unless you want The Guilds database to explode...

[alba gu braith]

I thought of the idea of a Total War game that would cover the time of World War I and World War II. The only trouble is that there would be a lot of countries involved plus the technology changes would be drastic. You could cover the time span from perhaps 1910 to 1946. The original major factions would be the British, French, Americans, Russians, Japanese, Chinese, Germans, Austro-Hungarians, Ottomans, Dutch, Belgians, Serbs, Italians, and Arabs. Then later on in the game you could expand the factions to include the Poles, Spanish, Egyptians, Finns, Persians, and of course Rebels and Partisans. There are probably a lot more factions to include.

I would also love to see a Napoleon Total War. I know there is already a Napoleon game on the market but I think the CA people really should just do it. Perhaps an expansion pack featuring the American War of Independence and the War of 1812. The total time span could go from the time of the French and Indian War in 1755 to the end of the Napoleonic War.

[qmark]

Gotta say there's already an excellent Napoleonic TW mod, as I'm sure you know. Coupled with the pipe bands and drummers, it's great stuff!

An Oriental TW sounds good to me though.

[Consul Flaminius]

Like the sound of a mod covering 1910-1946 ~:cheers: