New Total War game to be revealed in next month's PC Zone! (?)

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

From a guy called God of Thunder on TWC:


The next issue of PCZone magazine (no. 165) has a 12-page world exclusive on the next Total War game, with screenshots and 'unmissable gameplay revelations'. It's out February 2nd.

LINK (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=41123&page=1&pp=20)

Let the speculation begin!

[Rilder]

OMGS OMGS OMGS

OH MY GODS... MUST GET PCZONE magazine.... dies

[The_Doctor]

uhhjIN ;,SBWRLK KGWV

:2thumbsup:

OMG, I think I am going to go crazy broadway-style.

[Ianofsmeg16]

12 pages? Damn it must be good!

[The_Doctor]

The only names CA owns that they have not used are:
Legend: Total War
and
Empire: Total War

Thing is that they bought (Is that the right word?) them years ago.

CA are also recuiting people for their next console game:
http://www.creative-assembly.com/jobs.html

[Rodion Romanovich]

Hopefully that just means they'll buy the new name one day or so before the announcement. Legend or Empire would be boring. I'm hoping for something all the way from Pike & Musket to Napoleonic era. All they'd need to change from RTW would be some bug fixing, better AI, more complex diplomacy, and preferably create playable naval battles. It might sound like a long list but building from the existing battles a naval mode wouldn't be too difficult to create I think, and the other things would be less difficult than the actual making of an entire new game from scratch, if they use the RTW engine.

[King Noob the Stupid]

I want it to run on 1800 MHz, 512 MB of RAM and a cheap but new AGP graphics card->It won't->I don't need to worry how 1337 it's gonna be :skull:

[Just A Girl]

Lets hope They finish this game b4 they release it,
and Also finish patching it b4 they release the inevitable expantion.
(They used to use the expantion to fix bugs to force people to buy the new expantion IMO, I hope they dont do that again, As its Underhanded)

However on a plus note they seem to be patching RTW well.
So I have Great expectations of there next game,
Lets hope Like pip the game lives up to them.

[The_Doctor]

if they use the RTW engine

Evolution and Revolution is their policy (unless it has changed), so the next game will be an "evolved" version of the RTW engine, like MTW was to STW. They will also be working on the revolution bit, which will be for the game after the next game.

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

If it is 'Empire' as people said, I'd wager it will be set from the 16th-19th centuries, feature a pretty much whole world map and have proper naval warfare.

[The_Doctor]

feature a pretty much whole world map

That would be like a 1000 provinces.:help:

[King Noob the Stupid]

Not necesssarily, I think for example the colonies in America were pretty big, 4-5 provinces would perhaps be enough for the entire southern America.

[The_Doctor]

Not necesssarily, I think for example the colonies in America were pretty big, 4-5 provinces would perhaps be enough for the entire southern America.

That sounds a bit too low. Maybe 10-15 for South America.

[Rilder]

It could be a based off some odd fantasy world a story writer is making up right now hehe, or it could be about ants... Ant: Total war ahahahah or it could be that bloody diobocil impossible to ever happen thing called Star Wars

or it could about alexanders Great empire... who knows, as long as it aint Napoleon....

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

That would be like a 1000 provinces.:help:

It would be a good few no doubt, but this is the next stage now and CA have to move beyond the Europe/North Africa/Near Asia map. 'Empire' would be pointless without the Americas, Africa and Asia.

[edyzmedieval]

YAHOOO!!!

NEW TW GAME!!

I'm buying myself a subscription to PC Zone. ~D

Is it possible to buy only a single number?

[Gurkhal]

Empire: Total War

That almost sounds more like China to me than 16th-19th centuary.

[asilv]

EU trademark database says that Empire and Legend names were registered at the same time as Rome: Total War was so I think they were just alternative titles for RTW.

[Reidy]

hopefully, if it is Empire Total War it will have several seperate campaigns for different parts of the world.

[Rilder]

hopefully, if it is Empire Total War it will have several seperate campaigns for different parts of the world.

Actually That would be genius for a total war game, 4 campaigns, one simular to the time in which shogun total war takes place, 1 for the Medieval era of MTW , another for the RTW period, and to top it off, though i dont want napolienic everyone else does so throw that in as the 4th time frame, the expansion could be a campaign about colonizing North America and Spains conquer or whatever of the incas. That game would pwn the world

[Ludens]

To be honest: I am a bit supsicious of that. Twelve pages? That's an awful lot, especially since the game is still far from completion.

But I really hope that I am wrong.

Incidentally, Legend: Total War was the original name for Spartan: Total Warrior. None of CA's games have been published under the title they started out with.


They used to use the expantion to fix bugs to force people to buy the new expantion IMO, I hope they dont do that again, As its Underhanded
That is not entirely true, as CA did patch vanilla S:TW and M:TW. Also, both games did not contain serious game-breakers like R:TW did (by my knowledge at least, but I have come late to TW), so further patching would be a lot of effort for little gain.

Now CA has more resources (and more fans), so they are better able to patch. Also, I can't help but think that R:TW's flaws were revealed much faster than either S:TW's or M:TW's because there are now some many experienced bughunters.

[Monarch]

Where is this magazine available to buy? Is it available in the UK?

Edit: http://www.pczone.co.uk/

Is that the correct magazine???

[Viking]

Sorry to put an end to the speculation, but it`s gonna be China. :book:

(anyone dear to bet against?)

[Geoffrey S]

Bah, PCZone. I've bought it occasionally, and haven't liked it.

I hope if it's Empire: Total War it's got something to do with the East, and particularly China. There's such a wealth of possibilities in that region which haven't been explored in the TW series yet.

[Samurai Waki]

Empires Total War is a rather ambiguous term. I mean it could be anything from Egypt...to China...To India...to the America's...To France...to Great Britain. I don't like this thought provoking nonsense...just make a Pike&Musket Era/Napoleonic Era/Victorian Era game already. :2thumbsup:

[Strike For The South]

Sorry to put an end to the speculation, but it`s gonna be China. :book:

(anyone dear to bet against?)

yes

[Quietus]

Somebody said Medieval 2: Total War in TWC; apparently, a blurb from an Italian magazine. I'm not sure if it is true though.

[jimmy]

as an example if its empire it could have more to do with campaigns off genghis khan or alexander the great. in fact you can base game on the likes of alexander through to genghis khan leaders instead of factions. there are already enough units avaliable to cover the periods or slightly alter some of the units.start of with camaign games" from the march of the "ten thousand" up to genghis or even khubali khan. thats what i would like to see the game based on campaigns of historys great military leaders. but for gods sake not musket, cannon napoleionic era.that would be duller than dish water.

[Lanemerkel1]

as an example if its empire it could have more to do with campaigns off genghis khan or alexander the great. in fact you can base game on the likes of alexander through to genghis khan leaders instead of factions. there are already enough units avaliable to cover the periods or slightly alter some of the units.start of with camaign games" from the march of the "ten thousand" up to genghis or even khubali khan. thats what i would like to see the game based on campaigns of historys great military leaders. but for gods sake not musket, cannon napoleionic era.that would be duller than dish water.



I'm thinking Mongol Empire (Largest Contingous Empire known to man) and Britain (Largest Empire Known to Man PERIOD)

[NodachiSam]

Hmm the mongol empire should has a lot of potential but except for China and Indian and Middleeastern kingdoms, You'd be facing alot of small tribal areas. The Chinese would have to be in as would the Indians, since they repelled the Mongols. Hmm Or maybe an indo, mongol, chinese MTW focusing on that part of Asia of course. If I'm not mistaken the empire of Tibet would be in there too... I'm kinda shaky on about specific chronological history in that area though. That could be pretty interesting.

Napoleanic Totalwar would be interesting too. I'm more fond of ancient eras though. Not to turn this thread into a"what would you want the next TW to be thread" I'll probably buy the magazine too. Even though I could just wait 3 months and learn everything the article probably would contain anyways.
Edit: Actually probably less than a month as the information of the article is diffused through the internet, but not the pictures...

[The_Doctor]

EU trademark database says that Empire and Legend names were registered at the same time as Rome: Total War was so I think they were just alternative titles for RTW.

I was thinking the same thing.

What period of time is popular right now? (movies, TV, books)

[Mount Suribachi]

Unusual for PC Zone to get the scoop, normally that goes to PC Gamer as CA PR man Ian Roxborough is a former PCG reviewer.

I'm hoping it will be Napoleonic era.

I'm guessing it will be MTW2, based purely and simply on the fact that the forthcoming series of Time Commanders features 2 medieval battles (Hastings and Stamford Bridge). Screenshots of those battles are on the .com and have been for months. So I figure, CA have done all that work on the models may as well do the rest of the game...

[Martok]

I would love for the next game to be Medieval 2, but that just doesn't seem likely. Even if CA *does* eventually make a second Medieval game, I can't see them doing it so soon already. I still think it's going to either China or possibly a fantasy setting.

[Pomerium]

I too would hope for something in the form of pike and musket era.
I am not too well informed on chinese history. I know that 1.3 billion people is a market hard to pass up.
Come on Feb.

[Mount Suribachi]

BTW, thought I should mention that when I was a subscriber to PC Zone, my copy used to arrive in the post a few days before it was in the shops - so we could find out in January ~:)

As for China: Total War....I'm not convinced its a commercially sound choice - Ancient, Rome, Medieval, Napoleonic are the popular eras in the markets where PC Strategy games sell. Shogun was quite a bold choice for the first TW game. I'd still buy CTW though ~;)

[gunslinger]

I would like to see MTW II. I'm not nearly as much of a military historian as a lot of people at this site are, but were pike and musket battles really that tactically challenging? I understand the strategic side of positioning armies, feeding them, and supplying them, but once the battle starts, what is there to do besides position your artillery and line your guys up 30 yards away from the bad guys and start shooting volleys from horribly inaccurate guns at each other until someone chickens out? I can't see a Napoleonic TW game having near as much depth on the tactical side of things as Medieval does, and I don't see them mass-marketing a game that is mostly strategic without the emphasis on tactical battles they have featured in past games. After all, if you want to play a glorified version of Sim City with no real battles, pick up a Civilization game.

Of course, there are a lot of people here who know a lot more than me about the battlefield tactics of Napoleonic times, and I invite you to enlighten me if I am wrong about the tactics.

I just really like the Medieval time period because it offers so many different types of units and a somewhat realistic way to upgrade to better types of units as time moves on.

I hope it's not set in China simply because I don't want to have to learn a bunch of strange names for provinces and units. I can understand archers, Feudal knights, Chivalric Men at Arms, etc. pretty much instinctively, and most of the province names on MTW are at least familiar enough that I can relate to them. On the other hand, I guess China: Total War would at least be educational for me since I know nothing about Chinese history.

[CBR]

http://www.freeforumzone.com/viewmessaggi.aspx?f=42923&idd=4802

Scroll down a bit to see the scanned page. I dont understand much Italian but I do understand the "Medieval 2: Total War" bit ~:)


CBR

[The_Doctor]

Of course, there are a lot of people here who know a lot more than me about the battlefield tactics of Napoleonic times, and I invite you to enlighten me if I am wrong about the tactics.

Read the Sharpe series.


Scroll down a bit to see the scanned page. I dont understand much Italian but I do understand the "Medieval 2: Total War" bit

Could it be fake?

What would happen to Chiv:TW mod?

[Martok]

http://www.freeforumzone.com/viewmessaggi.aspx?f=42923&idd=4802

Scroll down a bit to see the scanned page. I dont understand much Italian but I do understand the "Medieval 2: Total War" bit ~:)


CBR


Interesting. I'm guessing that GMC is an Italian gaming magazine, yes? Well if it's not a hoax, then perhaps my secret wish will be granted after all.

It still seems a little too good to be true, though. Not that I'm trying to rain on my own parade, but I just have a hard time believing CA would make MTW 2 so soon after the first one. Yes, I realize Medieval was released over 3 years ago already. I just have a hard time believing, though, that they would remake the game this quickly--timewise, it'd mean that Rome/Barbarian Invasion would have two Medieval games being released on either side of it. I'd think that CA would want to space things out a little better than that.

Don't get me wrong--Medieval 2 is the Total War game I want to see more than any other. It's just that I don't see them making it again this soon.

[Ianofsmeg16]

MTW2 MTW2 MTW2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:balloon2: :balloon2:
Oh I hope thats not fake :sweatdrop:

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

I can't imagine them faking that. If that's Italy's equivalent of PC Gamer I'd say we have our confirmation. I'm a very happy bunny as long as they start around 800AD to about 1453, and then do an 'Ottoman Invasion' add on which goes up to about 1600. To raise the bar it should really include a map stretching deep into Africa and all the way to Japan so we can create truly diverse battles and empires. Plus that way people can stop moaning about a 'China' or 'Shogun 2' game also.

Oh and the add on should include the Americas added to the map along with the Aztecs, Incas and Mayas playable. Maybe even include North America at the start for the Vikings?

[The_Doctor]

I can't imagine them faking that. If that's Italy's equivalent of PC Gamer I'd say we have our confirmation. I'm a very happy bunny as long as they start around 800AD to about 1453, and then do an 'Ottoman Invasion' add on which goes up to about 1600.

That would be cool. The rest is a bit much for one game.

[Viking]

yes


The situation has changed. Wanna bet against it being Medieval 2? :deal:

[Monarch]

Well there is a link on the page, www.gamesradar.it I checked it out and couldn't find anything concerning MTW2, of course I dont speak Italian and was getting by on my limited French (two similar languges). But yeah, I could find articles on RTW and BI but that was it.

And no disrespect to Italians, but why the heck do they get the scoop before America with it's huge gaming community or even Britain with a good gaming community and CA's homeland.

Anyhow I'm a little suspicious but if it's true then fine by me. I've not played MTW (well I own it, but dont play it...long story) so a MTW2 sounds fine to me. But I would have liked a Chinese one.

Oh but I really dont want Napoleonic, it's just like 'lets shoot at each other until a line breaks'. I would buy it but the only real part of the game would be the campaign map. I'd probably auto-resolve alot of battles as it would often just come down to numbers. So ye, I would buy it but probably still be playing RTW more often than not.

Of course my absolute hate would be a WW1 one, that's just not even tactics. Blackadder Goes Forth sums up the 'Generals' of the day.


Blackadder: Our battles are directed, sir?

Melchett: Of course they are. Directed accoring to the grand plan.

Blackadder: Oh I see. And would that be the plan to continue with total slaughter until everybody's dead except Field Marshal Haig, Lady Haig, and their tortoise, Alan?

[GaugamelaTC]

Just to put an end to taking evidence from totalwar.coms time commanders section. Mount suribachi particularly:

I am from Britain where the series is filmed and the reason it has been up for months is because the show was on months ago. The reason they made new models was because its cheap publicity for the engine, and not all of the models were even new. I'm not saying there's no chance in hell it will be MTW 2, I'm just saying don't take your evidence from this particular source.

[Monarch]

I am from Britain where the series is filmed and the reason it has been up for months is because the show was on months ago. The reason they made new models was because its cheap publicity for the engine, and not all of the models were even new. I'm not saying there's no chance in hell it will be MTW 2, I'm just saying don't take your evidence from this particular source.

Yeayh I missed the Hastings show but saw Troy which was also in season two. I think Lion television/Beeb may have cancelled time commanders actually.

[menander]

Edit: whoops

[Lentonius]

personally i would dislika a naopoleonic era game

im my mind it is just men standing in a line, shooting, and reloading every two minutes

but heck its not for me to decide

but personally i am hoping for an ancient asian one...

[Martok]

personally i would dislika a naopoleonic era game

im my mind it is just men standing in a line, shooting, and reloading every two minutes

but heck its not for me to decide

but personally i am hoping for an ancient asian one...


Agreed. I understand the appeal for a Napoloeonic game, but I don't think the battles would actually be that fun to play. They would be fun to *watch*, but that's about it. To me it seems you'd be pretty limited in your choice of strategy and tactics in Napoleonic-style combat.

Aside from Medieval 2 (which I still won't believe is being made until I see it for myself), I would very much like a Chinese TW game set in the Warring States and/or Spring & Autumn period. It's time CA went back to a slightly more exotic locale like they originally did with Shogun!

[Lord Zimoa of Flanders]

I know I'm talking probably to a thick wall here, but to all who think Napoleonic warfare was just lining up and shooting volleys at each other from close distance, have never ever read or studied anything about military warfare concerning this era.


At the moment there is simple not a game engine on the market that even comes close to simulate the magnitude and complexity of Napoleonic battlefields.


It has a reason why all great Military Schools like Sandhurst, Westpoint, Saint-Cyr etc... still study this age and teach in debt future Officers about Napoleonic tactics and strategy, not to mention the many High Officers and Military Scholars that have published about Napoleonic warfare.


A great many of the descriptions of Napoleonic era battles sadly amount to little more than self-fulfilling prophecies. Where when studying the detailed events and lower level or micro-battles, that took place over miles and miles of battlefield and sometimes lasted a couple of days, you will find out the richness and unbelievable fact that it was truely the epitome of warfare before modern weapons changed history forever.


You will see the total integration between infantry, cavalry and artillery, complex and flexible manouvres and formations, battle plans, tactics, organisation and simple courage, morale and heroics.


For those who are interested and want a good tip buy and read this book and you will change your mind, well I sure hope so:

Battle tactics of Napoleon and his Enemies by Brent Nosworthy

I doubt CA will try a Napoleonic game as I do not think they are ready for it, if they do I wish them all the luck and the hope they will do this era right.


P.S. NTW is fun to make both for MTW and RTW but at the Lordz we know it is utter rubbish compared to the real thing.LOL


Cheers,

LZoF

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

I think the next game after 'Medieval 2' will be a Napoleon based one. It would have to be so advanced and intricate however that it will require the Medieval to Rome 'revoutionary' overhaul to work.

[Monarch]

You will see the total integration between infantry, cavalry and artillery, complex and flexible manouvres and formations, battle plans, tactics, organisation and simple courage, morale and heroics.

As in any war. However I guess you are just talking about the era and not about a TW game? I mean due to the whole attack of the clones deal courage and heroics are hardly going to be seen (unless of course you count the more 'obvious' heroism of just turning up to fight.)

[Samurai Waki]

Honestly Sovereign have you been sniffing model glue? Have you not heard of the Blackwatch, Highlander Infantry, Connaught Rangers, The Old Guard, the Middle Guard, The Young Guard, The Grenadier Guards, Cossacks Guards, or the Pahvolvski Grenadiers? Just to name a few regiments that have had a long and noble history of combat expirience, dating back to the Napoleonic Era and before. I gaurantee you, it would take far more courage to walk in a steady line, whilst having cannon balls blowing through your ranks, all just to meet the enemy on the other side... Discipline was just as much a matter of self then as a matter of the guy standing next to you. I think I would be faaaaaarrrr more scared to walk into a situation like that, then hack-and-slash medieval warfare, just because of the uncertainty that your going to make it alive or not, generally in medieval combat it was either...god is on my side so I'm going to win...or god is not on my side, so I'm going to lose. lol.

[TB666]

I think it is good that it will be MTW 2.
The engine is good for it.
But if CA follows their steps then the game after will have a new engine.
Then it will be a perfect time for NTW.
Bigger armies and naval battles.

[econ21]

A MTW2 might be quite exciting, because it would presumably give CA time to fine tune things and be creative in terms of content. The basic RTW engine could be used without much modification and they would have learnt a lot about modelling the period from the original MTW. Hence they should have more development time to try stuff like improving the diplomacy or the role-playing aspects (missions, character development etc). It would also be an ideal opportunity to sharpen up the AI. A straight port of MTW to the RTW engine would be a little bland, but if CA take the opportunity to improve the core TW gameplay, it would be excellent.

[Just A Girl]

I hope they have the honour/valour armour and weapon Bonuses for Mp games like STW,
I know they can unbalance the RPS system of the game if utilized incorectly Expeshialy if the honour bonuses add asmany combat points to your unit as they did in stw,
A better balance of cheap units honour cost could help fix that whilst still allowing The Aditional tactical need of strengthening 1 group to allow it to defend succesfully against a nother..

Personally I Like trying to guess wether my opponent will use h4 or h5 no dachi, and then adjusting my yari sams honor so they can put up a decent fight whilst still trying not to spend to much money on my yari sams,
I also like being able to reduce my muskets to honour 0 which makes them runaway fast.
But allows me to spend more on the people who are defending them so they dont need to run away.

I really Like that part of STW mp,
I also like that It can affect the out come of the battle.
To me its an integral part of the mp expirience,
and something id like to see in MTW2. or any TW game,

[Martok]

A MTW2 might be quite exciting, because it would presumably give CA time to fine tune things and be creative in terms of content.... It would also be an ideal opportunity to sharpen up the AI.


It's that part that particularly concerns me, Simon. If they make Medieval 2 but don't upgrade Rome's AI, the game is not going to be much fun--which is the most polite way I know how to say that. No matter what the next Total War game is, the AI needs *significant* improvement on both the strategic and and tactical levels (particularly the tactical end, but both sides of it could definitely use the help). I won't be able to buy the next game unless the AI is beefed up considerably.

In addition to improved diplomacy (since that's one thing that's never been great in any of the TW games, much as it pains me to say so), I would also add that the factions need to be better balanced this time around. The Romans and Egyptians were simply way too easy in Rome, whereas as it was absurdly difficult to get off the ground when playing as Carthage and (especially) the Greeks. I'm not claiming the faction balance was perfect in Shogun or Medieval (and I actually have no problem with factions that are specifically listed as being easier or harder), but the discrepancies were particularly obvious in Rome.

[EDIT]: Sorry if I sound like I'm bashing Rome. It really isn't my intention to do so (and goodness knows I've done it enough elsewhere anyway ~:rolleyes: ). It's just that the game left me feeling badly burned, when I had wanted to like it so much. My expectations were admittedly very high after Shogun and Medieval, and I was absolutely crestfallen at how Rome turned out. It was beautiful to watch and to listen to, but that was it. I just don't want another disappointment like that, and am very much hoping that CA can restore my faith in their abilities to make an incredible strategy game again.

[Devastatin Dave]

It will be "Bug Total War". It will be unmoddable with some of the most frutrating bugs ever, and it will take CA atleast 6 months after the release to issue a patch. Once the patch is loaded, virusver.1.1, it will then format your hardrive and fry your mother board. Thanks CA!!!:laugh4:

[Yun Dog]

Empires - Total War

= Age of Empires + TW :furious3: :oops:

could be like a CIV 4 TW where you start in the stone age and globally expand your empire

:idea2:

but more likely its going to Victorian times

:laugh4:

[Shottie]

I like Blind Kind of Bohemias idea with the Ottoman Invasion addon, but that is a lot for one game.

[SomeNick]

MTW:2 ??

Haven't bought Barbarian Invasion yet... but I'd buy that!

[Samurai Waki]

I like the Medieval Era as much as the next guy...but don't you think CA might be beating the horse to death a little on this one? If it is going to use (as I imagine) the RTW engine, I'd like to see China: TW or something instead.

[Monarch]

Honestly Sovereign have you been sniffing model glue? Have you not heard of the Blackwatch, Highlander Infantry, Connaught Rangers, The Old Guard, the Middle Guard, The Young Guard, The Grenadier Guards, Cossacks Guards, or the Pahvolvski Grenadiers? Just to name a few regiments that have had a long and noble history of combat expirience, dating back to the Napoleonic Era and before. I gaurantee you, it would take far more courage to walk in a steady line, whilst having cannon balls blowing through your ranks, all just to meet the enemy on the other side... Discipline was just as much a matter of self then as a matter of the guy standing next to you. I think I would be faaaaaarrrr more scared to walk into a situation like that, then hack-and-slash medieval warfare, just because of the uncertainty that your going to make it alive or not, generally in medieval combat it was either...god is on my side so I'm going to win...or god is not on my side, so I'm going to lose. lol.

Yes, I acknowledged in my post that in the era there was bravery, heroism and courage. However what my point was was that heroism would be very hard to include in a GAME.

I apologise for maybe not being clear enough in my post, but even so that first comment was a little OTT.

[Samurai Waki]

I apologise for maybe not being clear enough in my post, but even so that first comment was a little OTT.

Sorry. I meant it as a jibe...and I also drank 3 Red Bulls before I posted so I was feeling a little twitchy and hyper-active.

:bow:

[Bartix]

I can't imagine them faking that. If that's Italy's equivalent of PC Gamer I'd say we have our confirmation. I'm a very happy bunny as long as they start around 800AD to about 1453, and then do an 'Ottoman Invasion' add on which goes up to about 1600. To raise the bar it should really include a map stretching deep into Africa and all the way to Japan so we can create truly diverse battles and empires. Plus that way people can stop moaning about a 'China' or 'Shogun 2' game also.

Oh and the add on should include the Americas added to the map along with the Aztecs, Incas and Mayas playable. Maybe even include North America at the start for the Vikings?
All of that! :2thumbsup:
And better AI! :laugh4:
And more moddability!! :jumping:

[Monarch]

Sorry. I meant it as a jibe...and I also drank 3 Red Bulls before I posted so I was feeling a little twitchy and hyper-active.

:bow:

Rofl, evil caffeine!

Anyway, it just occured to me. Where has it been announced that PCZone have the scoop? I was just wondering because it it's a website it could be worth a read.

[Mount Suribachi]

Yeayh I missed the Hastings show but saw Troy which was also in season two. I think Lion television/Beeb may have cancelled time commanders actually.


Um, are you sure? I'm pretty sure the next series hasn't been shown yet. Aryeh Nuschbacher (sp) posted in the Main Hall last year to say the new series has been filmed and won't be shown till 2006.

As for an Italian mag getting the scoop, maybe it was just a boo-boo on their part - just like PC Zone and PC Gamer have announced in this months issues that they're going to have a preview of TW4 in the next issue, so has this Italian mag, but they've let the cat out of the bag by saying its MTW2...

If it is MTW2 I really hope they expand the era - all the way back to the 7th Century so we get to include stuff like the rise and expansion of Islam, Charlemagne. And carry it on into the renaissance and reformation :2thumbsup:

As for the XP, Ottoman Invasion is good, how about Norman Invasion?

[Mount Suribachi]

Rofl, evil caffeine!

Anyway, it just occured to me. Where has it been announced that PCZone have the scoop? I was just wondering because it it's a website it could be worth a read.

Its on P.129 of the february issue (sat in front of me right now)

[The_Doctor]

I think there should be several campaigns:
-Dark ages/rise of islam 500-1000
-Early medieval 1000-1300
-Late medieval 1300-1500
- A load of smaller campaigns, eg Crusades, Ottomans, Reconquest of Spain, 100 years war, Mongols, Hussites, Swiss, etc.

[Kralizec]

MTW2 could be really awesome, provided that CA will integrate the best of both RTW and MTW.

For example: a slightly tweaked but overall the same version of the family trees in RTW, but being able to intermarry between royal families like you could in MTW.
The same mercenary system like in RTW (MTW's mercenary system didn't really make sense), with regionally accurate mercenaries like swiss halberdiers, turcopoles etc
RTW sieges are perfectly cut out for a medieval timeframe, CA just needs to weave out some pathfinding bugs and they can't go wrong.
Just like you would be able to build forts in RTW on strategic locations, you could chose to build castles as well on the strategic map(though that would have to take a long time, possibly as much as a decade)
Plus re-emerging factions, valour+1 provinces, religious agents, etc!

I'll stop now before I get even more carried away :sweatdrop:

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

As for the XP, Ottoman Invasion is good, how about Norman Invasion?

I'm not sure, given the time periods we want as basic features I'd think the Normans will already play a big part in the main game.

[Oaty]

medieval 2 screenshots (http://pc.gamezone.com/gamesell/screens/s15968_1.htm)

[Ianofsmeg16]

Don't even joke

[Monarch]

Um, are you sure? I'm pretty sure the next series hasn't been shown yet. Aryeh Nuschbacher (sp) posted in the Main Hall last year to say the new series has been filmed and won't be shown till 2006.

Actually no I'm not sure. But I swear I remember seeing Troy, I remember because they made a point of saying 'it's not a siege, it's a battle in front of a city'. Now, Eddie Marr or whatever his name is presented the first series, and the next series was by Richard Hammond, which I definately remember.

Link to back up me saying S2 has been shown: http://www.spheretv.com/timecommanders.htm


The first series of Time Commanders was broadcast in late 2003. The series featured battles from the times of the Romans. It was presented by Eddie Mair. The second series was broadcast in early 2005. The style of the second series was somewhat different from the first. Eddie Mair had left and was replaced by Richard Hammond. There was no commentary, so the job of explaining the battle was left to the experts. The background music was louder, and fast-moving split screens were introduced. The job of choosing which members of the team were to be generals was now down to the experts instead of the team themselves.

[Hambut_bulge]

I'd also love to see Medieval redone with the Rome engine. And I'd particularly like to see CA model the castles in the game on their real world counterparts. Or possibly even allow us to have a little control over the design of a castle, but that might be a bit too much.

[Gurkhal]

I saw a scan of some Italian magazine. It will indeed be a Medival 2.

[The_Doctor]

And I'd particularly like to see CA model the castles in the game on their real world counterparts. Or possibly even allow us to have a little control over the design of a castle, but that might be a bit too much.

Yes.:2thumbsup:

I would also like the sieges to be a bit more in depth. eg:
When you start a seige you zoom onto the battle map and position where your siege weapons are going to be constructed and position your units and encampment.

Then when the weapons are built/deployed you order them to attack sections of wall. This happens during the turns. When the wall is breached there is still rubble that units have to climb over.

The besieged can also do things. eg:
Sallying out to damage seige weapons.
Inside they can build small barricades near breaches.

There will be men inside the towers that fire at the enemy and can run out of ammo. These men must be killed to take the tower, but the attacker cannot use the towers themselves.

[Martok]

Oaty, you're a bad, bad man!! :laugh4:

[Brighdaasa]

a thread from 2004 (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=39412&highlight=mtw2)

featuring TosaInu saying there were speculations about mtw2 by CA. I wonder where he heard them, but i knew i had heard about mtw2 ages ago

[Lentonius]

i know it was still advanced, but in my mind the effect of guns was starting to kill off variety in types of units...

i know there were cavalry and many other types, but quite honestly there will not be as much bloody close combat as in the other games...

For me personally the naeopoleonic era was the era in which close combat died...

i mean, the zulu wars in that time period proved how the gun had supreme dominance over the world...




in an odd way maybe CA are doing a more asian based mod, or even an american one....

[The_Doctor]

Where did that Italian PC magazine cover come from?

I still think it is fake.

[Monarch]

Any thoughts on if it is a MTW2 if they will definately go with that title, I mean it kinda sucks. My subject knowledge of the period is little so it's hard for me to think up alternative named. Perhaps: Dark Age: Total War or a much more broader name such as Kingdom: Total War.

[Mikeus Caesar]

Medieval 2?

I'd buy that for a dollar!

[hellas1]

Hey All,

Did PC gamer mention a release date anyone?

Ciao baby :sweatdrop:

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I don't remember seeing anything about it in the latest PCG, but there is a small chance that I am wrong. I would go check but I'm a bit tight for time at the moment.

[hellas1]

Pleeeeessssee look it up!
I'm sure everyone would like to know.

Revamped MTW, holy _____! :idea2: Cow?
I love catapults, trebuchets and sieges. OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

Thank you!

By the way everyone, an American Total War would be tacky, in my opinion.
STW 2 should come out or China Total War or A combo of China Japan and the Mongols as well.
YESSSSSSSSSSS.

[Foreign Devil]

or it could be about ants... Ant: Total war ahahahah


You know, thats actually a fantastic idea. You could fight giant beetles and stuff, and manage your very own leaf-cutting empire. Insects: Total War would make an awesome game. I'm completely serious.

Also, since we know the game will be pretty buggy when first released, the lame jokes practically write themselves. :2thumbsup:

[Samurai Waki]

If its Ants: Total War, I hope they include Fire ants so I can swarm peoples houses and bite them to death:furious3: ....stupid fire ants *mumbles*

[Mattisius Carsonius]

Anyone who has played that ancient Sim game SimAnt will truly be able to envision how awesome an Ants: Total War game could be.

[Ludens]

Actually no I'm not sure. But I swear I remember seeing Troy, I remember because they made a point of saying 'it's not a siege, it's a battle in front of a city'. Now, Eddie Marr or whatever his name is presented the first series, and the next series was by Richard Hammond, which I definately remember.

Link to back up me saying S2 has been shown: http://www.spheretv.com/timecommanders.htm
IICR there were three series of TC, the first two with Eddy Mair and the third with Richard Hammond. The third series were shown when the 1.2 patch just had been released (I remember Nussbacher commenting on an obviously shuffling phalanx and concluding that the series must have been made before the release of the patch ~D ). I didn't like the third series at all: though several improvents had been made (including like the pre-battle skirmish), the show was just too hectic for me. The music was louder, the light was dimmed except for flashlights, and the speed of the game seemed much higher.

[Sykotyk Rampage]

ya they have done season 3, not as good as 1&2.

MTW 2.............excellent!
There is a god! I hope!

Or if not at least a game genie........

[GaugamelaTC]

I'm pretty sure there wwas not a third series since I live in the country it was made. Are you thinking of a similar show called decisive battles? If you can provide proof I'll believe you.....

Anyway Medieval Total War 2 sounds good, but going simply on past gamesthey won't call it Kingdom:total war or Empire:total war. It's always been based on the time period, that's the kind of name they've built up. I think total war has always been about hand to hand, so anything up to before napoleonic era would be great. I think for Medieval:Total war 2 they should instead do the exact same ears but for Asia instead of EUrope, that would be just as cool.

[Monarch]

IICR there were three series of TC, the first two with Eddy Mair and the third with Richard Hammond. The third series were shown when the 1.2 patch just had been released (I remember Nussbacher commenting on an obviously shuffling phalanx and concluding that the series must have been made before the release of the patch ~D ). I didn't like the third series at all: though several improvents had been made (including like the pre-battle skirmish), the show was just too hectic for me. The music was louder, the light was dimmed except for flashlights, and the speed of the game seemed much higher.

What does IICR mean?

But are you sure, three seasons? Check out this (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/rometotalwar/show_msgs.php?topic_id=24758585&pid=589390&page=0) thread of GS. Ignore all the talk about downloading, occassionally they do say 'will there be a 3rd season?' (posted only a few months ago) and "the second season was more of a show. Why did it end after that?" not exact quotes, near enough though.

Apologies for going off topic.

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

There were 2 seasons, one with Mair and one with Hammond.

[YAKOBU]

Sovereign - What does IICR mean?

I think Ludens meant IIRC and not IICR (Stands for If I Remember Correctly).

:charge:

[hellas1]

Hey folks,

Is MTW2 supposed to come out this year or what?

P.S. I live in the States so no PC Zone magazine here!

[NodachiSam]

Anyone who has played that ancient Sim game SimAnt will truly be able to envision how awesome an Ants: Total War game could be.

It's true.

[HighLord z0b]

So is there any word on whether this is real or not? I actually hope that it will be MTW 2 *crosses fingers*

[Martok]

Right now the general consensus is that it's a fake. Which doesn't necessarily mean it's *not* Medieval 2, but I would still doubt that it is. Don't mistake me: I would love nothing more than for CA to redo MTW on the Rome engine--I just don't think it's going to happen, at least not for the next game. As others here have pointed out, I seriously doubt CA would revisit medieval Europe again so soon. Personally, I still think it's going to be either set in China or possibly a fantasy setting--either of with which I would be perfectly happy!

[Ludens]

There were 2 seasons, one with Mair and one with Hammond.
You are right. However, have a look at these sites (link 1 (http://www.totalwar.com/time.htm); link 2 (http://www.totalwar.com/time2.htm)). The first series consisted of sixteen episodes, but halfway the format changed a little. I am not quite sure, but I recall a break in between episode 8 and episode 9, so I considered everything following episode 8 as a second series. The series presented by Richard Hammond lasted eight episodes as well.


I think Ludens meant IIRC and not IICR (Stands for If I Remember Correctly).
Indeed. It was a typo.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Thats true actually, I remember the funny horses the first series with the stretchy necks!

I stopped watching after Stamford Bridge, I was simply discusted!

MTW2 seems quite likely to me.

Napolionic? I hope not, there will only be twenty units max for all the factions.

Dragoons
Line Infantry.
Riflemen
Light Cav
Heavy Cav
Lancers
Cannon
Morters
Light Cannon
Highlanders
Guards
Napolion's funny guards in wigs.
KGL Infantry
KGL H. Cav
KGL L. Cav

Thats about it really, I mean you could have different units for different factions but all the infantry will be guys with muskets and bayonets except for the riflemen which would mean the British would mow down everyone, the cav would just be four types as well.

Then the centuries preceeding had very little international upheaval, most people were busy fighting Civil Wars.

Now a late Medieval/Renaisance Total War might be fun.

[Lanemerkel1]

I actually like the idea of Napoleanic Total War officially


and you would have more than twenty units:

Light Infantry - Mobile but weak
Line Infantry - Moderatley Mobile and Powerful
Heavy Infantry - Powerful but Immobile
Light Cavalry - same as Light Infantry in stength and mobility (comparative)
Battle Cavalry - same as Line Infantry in strength and mobility (comparative)
Heavy Cavalry - same as heavy infantry in strength and mobility (comparative)
Light Dragoons - can dismount before battle and engage in both Melee and Ranged combat from eithe horseback or foot, same as Light infantry in mobility and strength (comparative)
Medium Dragoons - same as Light Dragoons in ability and Line infantry in Mobility and strength (comparative)
Heavy Dragoons - same as Light Dragoons in ability and Heavy Infantry in mobility and strength (comparative)
Light Artillery - short ranged, accurate and weak
Heavy Artillery - long ranged, inaccurate and powerful
Battle Artillery - medium ranged, moderatley accurate, and mdium powered
Light Skirmishers - VERY mobile, but VERY weak at close range
Light Marksmen - VERY mobile, accurate, powerful and ranged but weak at close range, reloads slowly
Mounted Rifleman - Mobile, Long Ranged, powerful but weak at close range, reloads slowly
Line Riflemen - Mobile, Long Ranged, powerful but weak at close range, reloads slowly
Lancer Cavalry - Mobile, Melee only, powerful at close but no long/medium ranged abilitys
Sword Infantry - Mobile, Melee only, powerful at close but no long/medium ranged abilitys


then there would be different Valour levels and Weapon/Armour Levels.

there could be different stats for each faction based on the strengths and weaknesses of each factions weapons such as the fact that Belgium had powerful rifles with terrible accuracy, mobility and Reliability.

you could have varying sea units with the ability to play them (which would be awesome) such as Cutters, Brigs, Sloops, Pursuit Firgates, Frigates, Heavy Frigates, Men-of-War, Battleships, and Ships-of-the-line, with penalties and bonuses based on faction such as american armor and mobility bonuses, british firepower bonuses etc. as well as marines that come in every non cavalry unit above, and the option to take enemy ships instead of sink them.


there could also be three levels of troops: Militia, Veteran, and Experienced

there would be one of each type of units in the three levels making some

60 different units instead of 20

[Samurai Waki]

Wow. Some people have a really narrow minded opinion of the Napoleonic Wars. During this time period (and from then on), war became more about the Army rather than the man. Which is just great stuff for people who actually have any ability for commanding realistic style armies.

[Mithras]

The napolionic wars could go either way the tricky part would ensuring the battles remain dynamic in a period where they all fight in a simular manner. I suppose the differant political structures within each nation could prove interesting: the british parlement vs imperial france for example



I know it's not going to occur this time round but bow long do you think before we get WW2 total war?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Lanemerkel1

Some of those sound like total fantasy. Light Infantry weren't really any different, nor were skirmishers, they were just trained differently. As to Dragoons, well a Dragoon had to dismount to reload and I've never heard of a mounted rifleman.

Additionally I am fairly certain that the British 60th (Royal American Rifles) and 95th (Green Jackets) were the only rifle carrying regiments.

As far as heavy infantry, well what would they be? Again I don't think there was really any difference in equipment and I've never heard of sword infantry, except for the French Imperial Guards, who carried short sbres instead of bayonets.

All British Infantry Battalions were 10 Companies of 100 men, with one Grenadier Company and one Skirmisher Company. Despite this the whole Battalion would stand on line and engage the French, even the skirmishers.

Don't get me wrong, certain regiments, such as the Higlanders, were renouned for their charge and ferocity in hand to hand combat. While British Riflemen, your "Light Marksmen" were also very effective as they had swords. The Best units in the British army at the time were the Hanoverian KGL (King's German Legion.)

I too would like a Napolionic era game but I don't think it would work in Total War, for one thing the time period is too short and for another thing it would be too easy for it to just turn into a grudge match between the infantry without intellegant use of cavalry or cannon.

As to your understanding of ships I will say only this, a Man-O-War is a ship of the Line. Battleships are much later.

Sorry but my point stands so far, the era has far too much homogenity for Total War.

[econ21]

Sorry but my point stands so far, the era has far too much homogenity for Total War.

I am not sure Total War needs that much heterogeneity. I rather liked the simplicity of Shogun, where you have cavalry beats archers, archers beat spears, spears beat cavalry (if anything adding monks and naginatas to the broth diluted it IMO). The AI was actually rather good at handling the match-ups in that setting too. Similarly, I am not convinced we needed the swords vs spears distinction in MTW (not least because it was ahistorical).

With Napoleonic warfare you would have three main classes - artillery (=archers), cavalry (=...well, cavalry) and infantry (=spears). A decent game would catch the interactions between the two - especially the role of squares and morale in infantry vs cavalry interactions.

You could complicate things historically by distinctions such as light vs heavy cavalry; column vs line (indeed 2 rank line vs 3 rank vs 4 rank line); skirmishers; redoubts; horse vs foot artillery; various kinds of veteran and elite units etc.

Different nations might have rather similar units types in raw utility, but they certainly would be gloriously differentiated in terms of colour. But I think there were important tactical differences in how, say, the French, British and Austrians actually used their seemingly similar units (or how the Prussians used them before and after their defeats in 1807).

Napoleonic battles have just the right level of complexity and variety, IMO (IMO it's when we get to ACW, battles start to get a bit generic and only get exciting again with the tank). Perfect for a TW, but not for the RTW engine - it would take quite a bit of reworking for it to be authentic. Indeed, I think Napoleonic warfare might be harder to do TW style, because we have much more information about how battles actually were fought, so gamey tactics (e.g. if cavary were able to overrun everything, vanilla RTW style) would be much harder to stomach.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The problem is that in the Napolionic era it no longer works with simple interactions. Infantry could kill other infantry up close or at range and could kill cavalry. Cavalry were already becoming an anacronism, they could fight other cavalry and unformed infantry only. Cannon meanwhile had become accurate enough to kill everything.

You're right about tactics, they were very different and that was why the British almost always won. They formed a double line which could fire up to eight times a minute with the ranks taking turns. The French basic formed a great mass and marched to the beat of drums, very intimidating but the British would just mow them down rank after rank.

Once you add the rifle corps picking off the officers then its just murder!

[Mamba]

Another problem with the Napoleonic war theory is that there already is a Total War style strategy game out involving that exact time period.

It's called Imperial Glory, I believe.

[Samurai Waki]

It's called Imperial Glory, I believe.

Imperial Glory is a steaming pile of crap. It's not even worth mentioning as a contender to TW.

Personally I agree 100% with Simon.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Was meant for here.
.

[The_Doctor]

So, another hoax? (TOP)

The preview next month will be real.

The Italian thing might be a hoax.

[Mount Suribachi]

I'm with Simon - one of the things I loved about Shogun was that it only had around 12 unit types, and all of them had their uses - even peasants!

Just cos a game has a hundred different unit types doesn't make it any better. MTW did, and lots of them were useless, pointless, or simple resprays of another unit.

I think the Napoleonic era would be ideal for TW5, a new engine taking into account such vitally important issues as supply, a vastly improved diplomacy engine. And of course, naval battles ~:)

[econ21]

Infantry could kill other infantry up close or at range ...

Yes, but I think that tension would be fun if done right. Do you try to charge the enemy? Pop at them at long range? Or try to get close and then let rip with a volley when you see the whites of their eyes? Sid Meier's Gettysburg captured a lot of this - as, I believe does Cossacks 2. Morale and fire discipline would be key parameters here and an important source of unit differentiation.


Cavalry were already becoming an anacronism, they could fight other cavalry and unformed infantry only.

Becoming so, but they still had teeth. Think of the battle of Waterloo - the charge of the British heavy cavalry was arguably decisive in breaking the main assault of D'Erlon's (formed infantry) Corps. The subsequent charges of the French heavy cavalry were ineffective, but only because the English formed squares. Total War is pretty close to capturing this already - charge your knights into the front of spears and you almost have cavalry vs square (almost because your knights cavalry charge home, whereas Napoleonic cavalry was smart enough not to); charge them into the flank of spears and you have cavalry vs infantry not in square. Plus the use of squares opens up tactical variations - at Waterloo, if the French had brought up horse artillery and infantry in support, the English squares would have been in trouble.


Cannon meanwhile had become accurate enough to kill everything.

Yes, queen of the battlefield. But it was not that long range, needed support and could be countered (e.g. reverse slope defense - another thing the TW engine would need modifying to accommodate).


You're right about tactics, they were very different and that was why the British almost always won. They formed a double line which could fire up to eight times a minute with the ranks taking turns. The French basic formed a great mass and marched to the beat of drums, very intimidating but the British would just mow them down rank after rank.

But don't you think that clash of column and line would be great captured in a Total War style engine? What I've always liked about the Total War games is how well they capture the morale aspect of combat - the list of morale modifiers in TW is surprisingly long - and it has the basic elements captures lots of aspects (wavering, impetuosity, shaken, fear-causing troops etc). The British infantry definitely should have an edge, but they were not supermen and - like the Roman legions in RTW - would be beatable in a game, if fought right.

I think a Napoleonlike TW could work brilliantly - we haven't mentioned the strategic situation in Europe, which is almost ideal for a TW game - but the changes required to do so would need it to be in the next generation of the TW engine, not the reworked RTW engine that will be announced in February.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You aren't far wrong but the problem is that it does away with rock paper scissors and in that case unit differentiation is all down to skill. It would be quite one sided mostly as the English would tear through anything, especially since they have the KGL Cav, arguably the best in the world at the time. This is the problem with homogenity when we really can say who was a lot better.

[Samurai Waki]

You but you can also agree that Units that had notoriety (like the KGL) were given positions based on their previous records on where they would be most likely to fend off or charge an incoming unit. Sure a lot of the these guys had skill, but most of it came after years of campaigning. I also disagree that the Brit's owned, they were gifted though with the likes of men like Wellington, Picton, and Nelson who had a grasp on the elements that could destroy the enemy. Had France not had Napoleon, Ney, Sault, or Murat, I garauntee you that they wouldn't have made it nearly as far as they did. By Waterloo, Napoleon was spent, had he ordered his Old Guard to Charge behind Ney, they would've cut Wellington's army into pieces, but he knew that it would all have eventually been over anyway.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm affraid you're misinformed. The British Infantry were superior because of training, they were the ONLY army in the world that used live ammo in drills. As to the cavalry the critical thing with the KGL was dicipline, which British cavalry lacked and French cavalry had, up to a point. You don't get an elite reputation straight off and British cavalry was used just as much as the KGL, they usually bunched into a big mass and went for a glory charge.

As the to the Old Guard, when collum faces line line wins, especially when line is firing almost twice as fast.

[Andy Shadows]

I hope there's gonna be some finns in it finally.

[InsaneApache]

Cannon meanwhile had become accurate enough to kill everything.

Apparently Ceasers artillery had a longer range than Napoleons cannon.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
So, another hoax? (TOP)
.
.
:gah2: Scratch this, it was meant for the other thread. :wall:
.

[Oaty]

Interesting observation by deejayvee 3rd post down

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm7.showMessageRange?topicID=33030.topic&start=181&stop=183

Anyways the link for medieval is has a medieval1 in it

http://www.totalwar.com/community/medieval1.htm

:edit forgot to add the shogun/rome addresses simply have plain old shogun/rome in them not rome1/shogun1

[econ21]

Interesting observation by deejayvee 3rd post down

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm7.showMessageRange?topicID=33030.topic&start=181&stop=183

Yes, very interesting. My money is now firmly on a MTW2. Although I won't be disappointed either way (so long as the next TW is not fantasy!).

[Andy Shadows]

How about, civlizations - total war? :p

Don't know, but it seems that all the good ideas have been already used. I know that one of the most fabulous things in total war series is the historical realism, but maybe mythologies - total war could be nice. Each nation would have their gods as their assistance.

[Mount Suribachi]

Yep, all the signs are definately pointing to MTW2....though I am curious as to what prompted CAs comment that we would be "intrueged" by it...will it continue into the renaissance and reformation?

[Captain Fishpants]

Yep, all the signs are definately pointing to MTW2....though I am curious as to what prompted CAs comment that we would be "intrueged" by it...will it continue into the renaissance and reformation?

As I said over at .com premature "elderly confusion" on my part should be read into some of my comments about future products. Different bits of CA are working on different products, as you might expect. However, I stand by my implication that the ideas in those products are suitably intriguing.

When I find out what is really going on, I will be killed to prevent the information falling into the wrong hands. But seeing as no one tells me what's going on, I'm actually quite safe. :laugh4:

[IceTorque]

Yes, very interesting. My money is now firmly on a MTW2. Although I won't be disappointed either way (so long as the next TW is not fantasy!).

I would prefer realism as well, but above all I want game immersion.
If a fantasy type TW can immerse me into it's story line/gameplay, so be it.
For I will be happily gaming away and oblivious to the world.

[Martok]

Yep, all the signs are definately pointing to MTW2....though I am curious as to what prompted CAs comment that we would be "intrueged" by it...will it continue into the renaissance and reformation?


Well I know *I* would certainly be intrigued by Medieval 2, if only because that's about the last TW game most of us would be expecting! As others have pointed out, it would be pretty surprising and unexpected if CA were to revisit Medieval Europe already. Even if MTW 2 were already in the pipeline, it'd be more likely that it would be the game coming out in 2008 on the new engine CA has hinted that they're working on.

[Emperor[1G]]

Personally, if its NOT Napoleonic in nature, I won't even give it a look. Thats how pissed I am at CA/Sega.

[Mount Suribachi]

Well I know *I* would certainly be intrigued by Medieval 2, if only because that's about the last TW game most of us would be expecting! As others have pointed out, it would be pretty surprising and unexpected if CA were to revisit Medieval Europe already. Even if MTW 2 were already in the pipeline, it'd be more likely that it would be the game coming out in 2008 on the new engine CA has hinted that they're working on.

TBH, I think the other way. I mean, look at it from SEGAs point of view.

MTW was a huge commercial and critical success. You've bought a company (CA) with a kick-ass, cutting edge game engine that has already produced one huge commercial and critical success. For a minimal outlay, you can use that engine to do a sequel to a game that was a huge success using 2d sprites for graphics (gasp!). They make a lot of money for very minimal effort.

I mean c'mon, just look at the games charts, its FULL of sequels. In todays unoriginal, Publisher money driven games industry, sequels to popular games are where its at. And 4 years between MTW and MTW2 (probly more like 5 by the time it comes out) is a long time these days.

Total War is a cash cow for SEGA, MTW2 is a sure fire way to put $$$$ in their coffers.

And I have no problem with a MTW2, especially if the jump from RTW to MTW2 is as big as the jump was from STW to MTW ~:)

[Martok]

TBH, I think the other way. I mean, look at it from SEGAs point of view.

MTW was a huge commercial and critical success. You've bought a company (CA) with a kick-ass, cutting edge game engine that has already produced one huge commercial and critical success. For a minimal outlay, you can use that engine to do a sequel to a game that was a huge success using 2d sprites for graphics (gasp!). They make a lot of money for very minimal effort.

Total War is a cash cow for SEGA, MTW2 is a sure fire way to put $$$$ in their coffers.

I concede you have some pretty good points. I simply cannot make myself believe, however, that even Sega would do something so transparent. Do I think Sega & CA would like to remake Medieval? Yes, absolutely. Do I think they would do so this soon again? No. I realize it's possible I'm just being willfully naive, but I truly do have a hard time believing Sega and CA would come back to medieval Europe already, when Medieval was the game just before Rome. (I would perhaps have a different opinion if Medieval had been the first Total War game released, but I digress.)


And I have no problem with a MTW2, especially if the jump from RTW to MTW2 is as big as the jump was from STW to MTW ~:)

Dang it, Suribachi, stop making me secretly hope that Medieval 2 might be the next game! ~;p I just don't want to have my dreams crushed!

[econ21]

Dang it, Suribachi, stop making me secretly hope that Medieval 2 might be the next game! ~;p I just don't want to have my dreams crushed!

Not sure what you are worrying about. I do not want to anger the good Captain Fishpants, but am I the only one who read his post in reply to Mount in this thread and came to the conclusion that I do not need to buy next month's PC Zone? I now know what the next TW game is going to be.

[Martok]

Not sure what you are worrying about. I do not want to anger the good Captain Fishpants, but am I the only one who read his post in reply to Mount in this thread and came to the conclusion that I do not need to buy next month's PC Zone? I now know what the next TW game is going to be.


Of course I read his post; don't be silly! [sticks toungue out at Simon, and then runs away] But seriously....

I just don't think you can conclude anything from his commments one way or the other. Yes, I realize one could argue his evasion could be taken as an oblique confirmation that Medieval 2 is, in fact, the next game coming out. But going by Fishpants' posts in times previous, I think you could just as easily argue he's simply being coy because he's eeeeeevil and enjoys torturing us because he knows he can. ~D

In the end, unless he or another member of CA says flat-out that MTW 2 is the next game, I don't dare believe anything I see or hear until that issue of PCZone comes out. Again, I'm not trying to be a party-pooper. I just don't want to get my hopes up that Medieval 2--which is a game I desperately want to see get made--is the new game coming out until I see confirmation for myself. Therefore, and until then, I will be spending the next couple weeks playing devil's advocate. (Yes, I am my own worst enemy at times!) ~:rolleyes:

[Mount Suribachi]

Not sure what you are worrying about. I do not want to anger the good Captain Fishpants, but am I the only one who read his post in reply to Mount in this thread and came to the conclusion that I do not need to buy next month's PC Zone? I now know what the next TW game is going to be.

OK, we're all pretty confident that its MTW2, but c'mon, I am dying to see that 12 (TWELVE) page preview, with all its lovely screenshots, developer insights, new game features etc.

I'm as excited as a 7 year old in mid-december watching the endless adverts for toys on TV and desperate for Christmas Day to come so I can see what Santa brought me ~:)

[HighLord z0b]

I really don't think it's that hard to believe it's going to be MTW2. It's got the new RTW engine, a huge fan base for that era and they may want to try medieval again to increase the historical accuracy that they missed in MTW and RTW.

They know that there are still fans modding MTW for more realism and the critisism aimed at RTW (egyptians etc.) so this would be their chance to fix it. Introduce more playable factions (especially the Normans, Burgundians, Finnish, Kipchaqs etc.) with more realistic units and better diplomacy and AI.

The other option is that it may still be Medieval, but they may go the opposite route and make it non- historical, maybe fantasy or mythology, or some sort of parallel earth.

When does the mag come out, and what countries is it available in?

[Mount Suribachi]

PC Zone UK, 2nd Feb. But subscribers usually get it a few days before its in the shops.

[MAt]

Apologies if this has already been posted, but just for anyone that still hasnt seen them, feast your eyes on these...

http://www.tothegame.com/screenshot.asp?id=4972

:2thumbsup:

[The Darkhorn]

Personally, I hope it's not medieval 2....yet. So many folks have done so much hard work modding the game into some great stuff. I hate to see it all possibly become "Obsolete," for lack of a better term, so soon.

[MAt]

Yeah, its unfortunate, but then there is a mod for just about every possible conflict that the TW team could go onto next, chances are they were gonna have to phase out some poor guy's effort.

I think Medieval 2 was pretty much about the only idea they could go with without someone complaining CA was ripping off their mod!

[econ21]

...feast your eyes on these...

http://www.tothegame.com/screenshot.asp?id=4972



Drool...:jawdrop:

[Kickius Buttius]

Nice screenshots. Really nice.

[Dutch_guy]

I wish CA would make an official confirmation about the would be MTW 2.

Some might argue that screenies are a conformation but I want CA to tell me so ! :2thumbsup:

And those knights do look very good.

:balloon2:

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

I really it looks class and CA have taken it up a level. To be honest sod everything else, i want to see Medieval total war 2 with Rome graphics. Nothing else and i'm sure you lot want that too. It looks very tasty indeed:laugh4:

[Brighdaasa]

well, WorthPlaying even has a lil text to go with the screenies:

http://www.worthplaying.com/article.php?sid=31257&mode=thread&order=0

[Templar Knight]

sweet :2thumbsup:

[Slasher]

It says CA will announce it at the end of the day...it's already 10:45PM here...so it looks like I am going to have to stay up until about 7AM until the last possible chance of its announcement is done....I can't wait for the next game :wall:

[Oaty]

Well looks like it's 100 percent official as there are multiple gamesites with screenies. And I was hoping for China :sweatdrop:

[Duke John]

Why are people saying that it is going to be released in 2007? With the past releases there was 1 year between each and every release. And I can't say I am that excited, R:TW really reduced my trust in CA that it can produce quality games and cares for the community.

[King Noob the Stupid]

The screenies look quite 1337, but it is just me or don't some of the horses have any legs? But I'd love MTW2 too, it would be a way to play some kind of MTW again on newer hardware:2thumbsup:

[Lanfire]

MTW 2 will be running on the old engine, but isn't the egine gonna polished in some way because the screenies look much better than in the old engine.

or are my eyes telling lies?

[Vladimir]

I want Europa Unversalis: Total War. 1419-1820 and eventually a world to explore should keep a lot of people happy for a very long time.

[KukriKhan]

So: It is official. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1042190#post1042190

We'll close this speculation thread, and Invite all to the new thread, linked above.