Printable View
Well CA have done the inevitable and made Rome II (no bad thing mind you). What I want to know is where they go from here. Presumably it's too soon for Empire II, and Medieval III seems like a long shot as well. Is it possible? Could it be? That we will get a new time period to playerrm... rule in.
Thoughts?
(Probably completely inappropriate to speculate on such things so soon after the announcement but this was my first thought when I heard)
Millwall v Glasgow Rangers Total war 1980s stylie.
I am probably all alone on this board in having big love for Empire. I still play it, although in highly modded form. There's just something about the period, about men in powdered wigs on wooden ships running all over the globe to stamp out dusky heathens ... I dunno, I love it. Even with the bugs and the irritations.
If they made an Empire II and gave it the kind of polish and shine they gave to Shogun II, I would be a happy little lemur indeed.
I hope they'll be a bit more adventurous with the TW formula rather than just slap a new setting on it. Personally I'd like to see a complete redesign of the interaction between the strategic and tactical layers, which has remained basically unchanged since the first Rome.
They'll have a hard time taking risks with SEGA as the funding source. I'm already concerned about the possible "safe" directions they appear to be taking with Rome 2. If spending more money to develop means just making it prettier and scripted, personally, I'll be very disappointed. I don't need things prettier than Shogun 2, I need better AI. I, like most of the people who play TW, play it SP, the experiences I get are improved by how well the game plays over all at the battle and campaign map level. Seeing face animations isn't going to for me if to get there you purposely ran me through a per-determined path. I want to play this with agency, meaning I make the decisions, the outcome is unwritten, and each campaign takes it's own path.
Ah right, I hadn't thought about that. With the battering SEGA has been taking, they'll probably regard CA as a safe source of profit until things change.Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
I really don't get the obsession over the faces of the soldiers though. Does anyone ever look at them? They also claim that more detailed death animations (or something along those lines) make the player more attached to his men, which would be a rather futile attachment, since they'd already be dead!
With Italian 'Ultras' and Turkish dlc.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I support you :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I really liked ETW as well and actually had a hard time switching back from guns to swords and spears.
I rarely look at animations. I don't mind them being there but I'm surely not asking for more. I do like dead bodies and bomb craters though. That really gives a sense about the scale of the battle you're fighting/just fought.Quote:
Originally Posted by quadalpha
I loved Empire (after the patched it and removed those terrible bugs), but Rome (despite its horrible AI and the limitations of its time) had a charm to it, due to its setting, that none of the others have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I'd personally would 'dig' an Assyria total war or something. I'd play it.
I think that if they were to do something original in the Total War series, they should do something along the lines of a mainland Asian setting; China to India, and possibly down to Indonesia. Someone more knowledgeable about Asian military history than myself would have to put a framing time period on that for me, but I think it would be interesting to have a few Chinese factions battling for control of China before turning attention to the South and West. The Mongols would at some point surge outward to attack China (and, being Total War, the rest of the map before their cavalry gets destroyed in the thick jungles of Southern Asia), and I'm sure that something would also be going on in India at the time. Simultaneously, small factions in the South (Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, etc.) would be battling it out for control of that area. Every general region (China, India, and the Southeast) would have its own internal warfare, as well as dealing with threats from neighboring areas. Also, unit variety would be retained (unlike Shogun 2 and Empire) due to the differences in each region and their specialized factions.
Only three years are left before the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War is over. I'd like to see that in Total War by 2015.
my thoughts are on dumdumdundundundumdumdundudun Hittite total war
I continue to hope for a Total War game set in either ancient Greece/Anatolia or -- especially -- during China's Warring States period. I'd play either one of those to death!
I still don't see that ever happening, as very few will want to play a Total War title with only two major factions -- there's just not much replayability there. I can perhaps see it working as an expansion (or part of one), but not a standalone game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Desertdude
Agreed. Plus the unit variety would be terrible; almost all the units would have to be line infantry. There would probably be several different artillery units, and some elite units, and some light infantry, but the variety would be less than that in FotS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martok
I am still hoping for an India Total war ... with 3 ages ...
1. 1500s - When firearms brought the Mughals to power
2. 1600s - Firearms everywhere but war elephants still rule. Europeans show up, but like in SIITW, they just give tech n weapons
3. 1700s - Europeans are a faction among themselves. Its a 3 way contest - Indian Native Factions, Invaders from Afghanistan and Iran, European fielded mixed Native and European Armies.
Although like majority of old total war fans myself wished for Rome2 to be done one day ,But I'm afraid it is too soon for CA to re-do ROME and I think can not repeat the success Rome1 had for them :( I wished for them to make something like 19th century total war game with global map instead of Rome.
I would love to see a better version of Empire some day but for now I had enough of gunpowder warfare.
What was very rarely done before (and never properly) is Total War style game centered around the late Bronze Age middle east. The major factions as the Hittites, Mycenaean Greeks or Hittites are quite well known to a wider audience, as is chariot warfare. A dynamic period with no power totally dominating witnessing the rise and fall of Empires as the Mitanni or Assyrian becoming a grand power for the first time. Maybe starting in the mid 16th century BC shortly before or after Egypt was reunified an the Hyksos overwhelmed and with the Minoans still around.
I don't think all or even most of those cultures had the kind of imperial ambitions associated with a Total War game.Quote:
Originally Posted by cunctator
More than most Kingdoms in Medieval Europe. Egypt conquered Nubia and the Levante up to Northern Syria, the Hittites brought the states in western Asia minor under their control and expanded into Syria and finally Cyprus. The Egyptian empire at its peak was measuring 2000 km from its northern to southern borders. Stretching over as much or more territory than the whole Shogun map.
Mycenaeans conquered Crete and founded outposts in Asia minor were they clashed with the Hittites. Assyrian Kings captured Babylon and reached the Mediterranean and lake Van during their campaigns Mittani fought with all of them and were destroyed by their expansive neighbors.
This scenerio would also feature some spectacular cities and sieges. Even today the collapsed walls of Qatna, a syrian city destroyed by the Hittites, are rising 15 to 20 m above the surrounding plain.
Hi,
I am student of CA and enjoying it full time.
Medieval 3. I want a new Medieval game, but slim chance of having one. A new era most likely will be the next.
I would like to see a Thirty Years War sim. This is a very interesting age and still uncovered. American Civil War would also be fine to me.
world war one imo. they can pull it off now
world map, include the wars in the african colonies. add japan, improve greatly on naval battles and submarines.
The big problem with the American Civil War is that there weren't any factions really; it was just North vs South. For a full release Total War title, this would get very dull, especially since most of the units would be identical (if not in name, then in stats, abilities, and overall role). I could see it possibly as a DLC down the line; if they decide to make an Empire 2 this might be a possible expansion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franconicus
The problem I think with WWI games is that, well, 90% of the game would be a 2 lines of troops sitting in trenches while artillery pounds each side. AFAIK there weren't any real line battles in WWI as there were in the 1800's, which would make Total War formations unrealistic. Plus you would have some aircraft and tanks as well, which would totally mess up the balance. Anything past WWI would be small, squad-based combat, and at that point it's not even Total War anymore, it's Company of Heroes, or Men of War.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stranger
I would certainly like to see how a WWI Total War title played out, and I trust that if they did make it, they would be completely confident in it before releasing it, and it would be great. It's just a matter of how they could make it, whether it would make sense for the Total War formula and general battle framework, and if it would be practical enough versus any of their other options.
Total War: Renaissance.
Covering, say 1500-1700.
Highlights:
Wars of Religion
30 Year's War
Japanese invasion of Korea
Manchurian conquest of China
Portuguese raiding in the Indian Ocean
80 Year's War
English Civil War
Spanish War of Sucession.
Italian Wars.
Ottoman Invasions.
Russian football supporters total war!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyj8ZbJccT4
I believe the timeframe you're talking about regarding China is around the time of the Fall of the Han Dynasty, and into the Three Kingdoms Period (220-280 BC) This is the time period probably most known by Westerners as it is the period that has been exposed the most. Recently there was a movie based around the time period (Red Cliff, which by the way is a great movie) and most of the Dynasty Warrior games take place in that time frame as well I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian to the Iron
I'm not sure how active the Mongols were in that period, but apparently Attila was around the mid 450. With that said, I would love to see a Total war around either of those eras. I'd say another time frame to be around the unification of ancient Egypt as well as another timeframe, but I think it would play out too similar to Rome TW (maybe it could be an xpack/DLC for it)
I honestly think Rome and Medieval offers the most varied battles, and fit the engine and game concept best.
I am, however, desperately hoping for a fantasy TW.... That could even open the game up to be an E-sport if they do it right.
China during the 3 Kingdoms would be fantastic, and maybe the Sui and Tang (includes attempted invasions of Korea plus uniting large parts of the country). Plenty of feral nomads, non Chinese tribes, pirates, rebels and unhappy peasants galore, and neighboring kingdoms (Korea and Japan especially).
And maybe one set during the rise of the Achaemenids. Plenty of variety there.
I think they could feasibly do a global total war from like the 1500's to the late 1800's. Or a total war from 1800 to 1920. It would allow for unit differences and technology advances.
Agreed, a near-east bronze age setting would be pretty neat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
Looks like it will be Warhammer (original, not 40k).
Well that was unexpected, I really didn't think they'd veer off the historical path. They'll certainly struggle to do worse than Mark of Chaos, I wonder how much inspiration they'll take from the Call of Warhammer mod.
hell yes!Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
That had better not replace the historical TWs!
I think that's extremely unlikely. Gamasutra says that CA has set up a separate team to work on the Warhammer project. Since CA has been expanding into other games recently, I wouldn't be surprised if they adopted the Firaxis model. That model is that there's one team working on the company's core franchise (Civ for Firaxis, Historical Total War games for CA) and others working on experimental stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by quadalpha
Good to know. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
Why not the 1800s? War of 1812, the near constant battles between England an France, Europeans messing with China and Japan, American Civil War would be really fun, plus Africa being colonized, you'd have a full world map to fight on with hundreds of factions that would be possible!
Don't think it would happen because we just had Napoleon, which is an enormous part of 19th century warfare, and we had FotS. I'm done with muskets for a while. Give me ancient China!Quote:
Originally Posted by Shmoof
I'm not into Asian history but I'm up for ancient China.
In the grimdark of the far future, there is only... total war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dellathane
Total Warhammer 40,000.
I personally would like something with a very wide field of play from the early period of history. The factions would range from the Minoan and Greek, through Asia Minor with the Hittites, include the early Egyptian Empire with Ramses II, on into Mesopotamia (Medes, Persians, Assyrians, etc.) and then along the Grand Caravan trade route to the early Chinese Empire/States. Northern India and the civilisations of Southeast Asia would be a part also.
Setting up three or four theaters of play and giving the possibility of a very long time to play everything.:yes:
They have pretty much used up the major era blocks (I mean wide eras such as classical and medieval not specific wars) except for the Bronze Age empires of Assyria, Egypt and Hittites. But then people have been suggesting that for a while and ca has still not made it yet. Instead they have moved back, making shogun II and Rome II.
I suppose they could make one for the age of Greek city states and the grecopersian wars?
imo they now have the technology to make a World Total War spanning first part of 20th century.
What about the Dark Ages? 500-1000AD with the potential rise of Islam. Or post-medieval and pre-empire? Era of the Reformation and Renaissance.Quote:
Originally Posted by seleucid empire
I would really like to see a game linking Medieval TW to Empire TW, it would be really interesting to play around with the transition to gunpowder.
Next game will be Medieval 3, IMO. or a game about 16-17th century.
That is called Medieval 2 and it already exists! (since it has early gunpowder units in M2)Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
I mostly played it with the Lands to Conquer mod by Just Lusted, but I think those were still pretty default.
Dark Age (though some now say it wasn't so dark) would be interesting. Clovis and the Franks, the German invasions of Britain, the Picts and the Gaels, the Muslim conquests - the scope is huge.
Or, Total War: The Iron Throne?
WW1 TW perhaps?
Barbarian Invasion covers the beginning of that. The gap right now is 476 to Hastings.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoboCaelus
I think the problem is the rapid change of social organization would be difficult to portray in Total War terms. It'd be quite a departure from the traditional Total War method of pseudo-nation states for the sake of simplicity. The rise of feudalism would have to be a key component to do the era any justice.
aka Medieval II: Total War: Kingdoms, Britannia:PQuote:
Originally Posted by LoboCaelus
there was early gunpowder in mtw1 too :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
i want to see a 2150TW, the first ahistorical TW ever ^^ or is it?
I would like to see a Pike and Musket era Total War Game. It could have the Reformation and its wars, early conquest/colonization in the New World, ideological wars eg the English Civil War etc.
My vote goes for Dark Ages: Total War, from 476 until 1066. Just imagine it:
The turmoil after the fall of the WRE
Religious tensions between Catholicism (Rome, Franks, Italian kingdoms, Lombards, Romano-British, Irish), Paganism (Saxons, Alemanii, Belgeae), Paganism (Danes and other northmen), Paganism of the Huns (Avars) and Orthodox Crhistianity (ERE) and the Muslim Moors, Fatamids (Harun-Al-Rashid) and probably others - the birth of Muhammad! Imagine the chaos!
The sturggle for dominance and the formation of Kingdoms and even Empires (Charlemagne)
The Danes and friends reaving the shores of Europe
The coming of the Magyars
The Ostrogothic and Visgothic kingdoms
and more.
The sheer potential with the emerging factions and great leaders like Muhammad, Charlemagne, Theodric etc. is staggering, not to mention the choice between staying Pagan or adopting Christianity, going for your tribal roots or attempting to rediscover the lost knowledge of the "ancients" (Romans, Greeks).
These are all great ideas. I especially like the dark ages scenario. But what i really.like to see nex is the Total Warhammer. Now the scope and atmosphere of such a game would be epic. Ofcourse we still dont know if it will be a part of the total war franchise or something completely new but f it is anything like the call of of warhammer mod, it would be great. I love history but i think this fantasy setting would bring a new breath to the franchise. After that it would be eveb more appealing to return to history.
We haven't had a game about the colonization of the new world. Medieval ends during the historical sack of Constantinople, which is a few decades before the start of the voyages to the new world. Empire starts with the new world settled already by Europeans.
The Renaissance, the Catholic/Protestant divide and the Ottomans starting at the top and then starting their decline would also add to the history. I believe the Ottomans were already in decline by the time frame of Empire.
M2TW: Kingdoms - the Americas expansion is what you are looking for. Also regular M2TW has this, albeit to a smaller scale.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewt
To be fair the colonial aspect in the base game of M2 is a very shallow experience. It was meant to be the final adventure to cap off a few hundred years of play in europe, not to be the main focus. Kingdoms - Americas, on the other hand, was a fun scenario. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
i think its too short a time frame with too few nations involved. it would basically only be the spanish with later on a bit of the french and the brits. and some specs of stranded dutch traders.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewt
im saying ww1 still :D
Yup. I want to remind people on one of the first real Multiplayer games ever, Gettysburg. That was played from many "STW-Oldtimer".Quote:
Originally Posted by Desertdude
I personal see this happen someday, its more or less a hybrid of Napoleon TW.
To get some ideas of developing involved here. Tons of time and money of gamedevelopment today is spent on historians and research.
If you go for something like Rome, you have to research the uniform, names, maps, army and so on…
The big advance of going for RomeII is simple and obvious, that research is already done, you have just to adjust a little bit and i bet, that they didnt
brought all ideas they had in Rome1. So now, they have just adjust a bit and save a lot of money and time.
I doubt that the current game concept can be successful for many more years. At some point a game concept is very good. Id say that about S2, that game is not perfect,
but in many aspects pretty good. At some point people start to ask, why they should pay again and again for the same thing.
This kind of topic raises ever year at least once. With Warhammer CA finally took over a very old idea of going for a "phantasy TW".
To get some of the old ideas in here.
What about a "Future TW", a WW1 or WW2 TW?
There is a lot left, with the problem of the general idea of this game. I can say, that I saw enough of TW. Its always the same, there is almost never something new.
Its not challenging and since we got online gaming, the KI doesnt matter anymore. I played S2 and after 2 months it was boring like hell and I dont even start with all the bugs...
Personally I'd like to see a WW1 with a lot of tech and research. Start the game around 1880's-1890's with Wilhelm II's come to power. Armies of that time wouldnt have things like tanks or fighters/bombers. Machine guns and other techs could be basic, and in that time there is a lot of what ifs. Can the Germans keep the Russians on their side? Can you bring back the glory of the Ottomans?
Let the game last till 1920s or so. I think the gameplay, tactics, and other changes would be a nice mix for total war. Most of them your units never really change. In empire and rome, you still use the same type of units, but they get better. With a WW1 game, you would start with riflemen, cavalry, and direct fire artillery and end the game with machineguns, armored cars, indirect artillery, tanks, and airpower.
Looks like we find out tomorrow.
https://i.imgur.com/Smdab7D.png
I sincerly hope that its the total warhammer. Fingers crossed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
As it turns out it is Total War Arena. Its seems that it will be an online meeting ground for multiplayer fans. Good for you guys i hope that it will be good.