TW4 what do you want?

We're getting a better picture now on the expansion pack for Rome. But unless I'm mistaken there's no official news about a future TW game. Spartan Warrior aside...

What do players want next?

What would you call it? Which era and location would you set it in? What functionality do you cry out for? What innovations can be made?

I suspect there’ll be no consensus. But I’d love to hear peoples views.

--

I apologise if this is dragging up a previous forum topic but pre any official announcement, this is our chance to influence, and the more we talk about it the better imo.

TW4 must have

Naval battles
airplanes
bigger variaty of units
better diplomacy
commanders with clearer personality
more historical battles
choclate icecream
heidi klum
babes
ferraris

Did I miss anything? ~:cheers:

I would like Religion: Total War, set in Europe and surrounding regions in the 16th (and maybe early 17th) century. In this the religious conviction of your ruler (faction leader) would have a huge consequence on diplomacy with other factions, the loyalty of your subjects, the morale of your soldiers and the loyalty of your family or generals. The battle engine would have to stay, but gunpowder units would be an enourmous addition (although "phalanx"-warfare would remain in the game as well). Of course naval battles would have to be implemented, as well as many, many more historical regions and cities, a new 'family' system, which doesn't only implement the royal family itself (maybe different styles of rule for different factions?). All units would be region specific (or mercenaries), and cities and castles would be based on their real appearance (making them all unique). Finally, many of the features of MTW (like factions emerging, family members revolting and marrying of princesses to forge alliances) would have to come back. By the way, being able to choose the name of your childeren (giving the real historical feel by having a name run for generations in the family) as well as being able to choose your governors and generals from the nobility originally attached to a specific region, would be very nice.

Well, many more ideas, but that's it for now.

For an historical period I'd like to see something Greek or maybe Persian, perhaps 1500-200 BC.

Actually I'd like to see the series try a less historical approach for once, something with a little fantasy, maybe Atlantean or other pre-historical period.

or how about Old Testament Total War?

ichi :bow:

I would like to see WWI or WWII totalwar.I think that would be a great challence for the developers :duel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franconicus

TW4 must have

Naval battles
airplanes
bigger variaty of units
better diplomacy
commanders with clearer personality
more historical battles
choclate icecream
heidi klum
babes
ferraris

Did I miss anything? ~:cheers:

---

The last four better be in there no matter what game it is.

I wish the combat would have more detail in it. Perhaps every soldier would look a little different. It would be awesome to have things like limbs being hacked off and riders being knocked off their horses and continue fighting. Gore and blood wouldn’t be the center piece of the game. However, if a soldier gets chopped in the arm, naturally his arm should fall off. I fear a Greek based game would be too similar to RTW. My vote would be back to Asia for a Chinese campaign or of the like. It just needs to be different and unique from the past TW games.

So long as it doesn't have firearms, it's good. I can enjoy firearms in strat games only if it's set at least WW1 era or later, and I don't want "Total WW" since that theme's done to death and because I think that TW series is better kept to the old days of swords n' spears.

That said, I think the warring states era of China would be an interesting theme for a TW title.

As for features that I'd like to see:

- Supply lines. This is one of the most important stratetic weaknesses of an invading army and it's a great shame that it hasn't been included in TW yet. It should be possible to try to capture or destroy your enemy's supplies. You would need to dedicate units to guard the supplies for your own troops. An underprotected supply train would attract brigands.

- Option to use scorched earth strategy. This could be combined with the raiding of supplies to totally screw up an invasion force.

- Naval battles in 3D battle map with player control over ships.

- A diplomacy system where alliances can be formed specifically against a faction. Ie factions A and B team up against faction X. Perhaps complete with agreement over how to divide the captured provinces. Also there should be a way ask your ally to attack a specific province of your common enemy.

- It should be possible to ask a faction to break their alliance, trade rights, etc to another faction. Or to "persuade" a faction to stop attacking another faction.

- If you keep making diplomatic agreements and breaking them, then there should be consequences. Other factions would no longer take your word for anything, so you could not get any more alliances and other beneficial agreements from them. Also, executing all the populations you conquer should earn you a bad reputation which would also hurt you diplomatically.

- When a faction is aggressively expansionistic, other factions might take note and gang up on it.

- Populations for provinces should be divided to separate figures for slaves, free men, and wealthy men/nobility. Units that are based on particular social class should only be recruited from that class (ie no recruiting of knights from peasants). If a province doesn't have enough citizens of required class then that unit can't be trained there untill the number has grown.

- Similarly, there should be a population of horses, camels, elephants, etc for each province. You could only train mounted units if there is enough mounts available. The rate of recovering their number could be increased by dedicating resources to breeding the animals.

- Technology such as better ship-types, siege engines, composite bows, fortification techniques, etc could be aquired from other factions and adopted. For example, faction A might lack the knowledge of how to build and operate ballistas. They face faction B in battle and suffer ballistas being used against them. Then they send agents to bribe some engineers of faction B to change sides and build ballistas for them. Faction A from then on is able to train their own ballista units.

- Developement of better units should require use of earlier units. It's not good if you can just skip the basic light infantry units, build the big barracks building and start producing the elite light infantry. In order to unlock the more advanced units, you should have made actual use of similar lower quality units in the battle field. Of corse, this would not be required for units that should be available to a faction at the start date.

- Terrain should be more varied and also it should be more significant, especially when it comes to movement of cavalry. Infantry and archers could be moved to places where cavalry can't reach them easily, hence giving them good tactical position.

- It should be possible to set forests on fire. Any units hiding in the forest would be killed, but the fire could also spread and kill your own units if you're not careful! Wind direction should be important factor when using fire. Also, burning buildings in cities should be a real danger to the army in the city, and fires should lower populations. It should be possible to try to burn down major parts of another faction's settlement like you can sabotage specific buildings in RTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ichi

For an historical period I'd like to see something Greek or maybe Persian, perhaps 1500-200 BC.

---

That would be nice.
I don`t wan`t a total war game that goes forward in time(from the RTW time period), rather backwards.

Perhaps the expansion would be "Alexandrian Invasion", where you have to fight of the maniac! :charge:

Bronze Age:Total War
1600-1100BC

Egypt Total war. At least they would'nt need to revamp too many units ~D

In all reality though China Total War for me

1st choice: Fantasy TW
2nd choice: Hellenic/Persian TW (during the Bronze Age, of course)
3rd choice: China TW (during the Spring & Autumn period).

You have forgotton:

Stone Age:Total War ~;)

mfberg

My obligatory comments:

I think the engine works best with pre-gunpowder, or, more specifically, pre-Industrial Revolution conflicts. While a WWI or WWII Total War would be interesting, it would require a radical departure from their current design. The scale of such engagements is, IMO, beyond the capability of the engine (as written) to handle: hundreds of thousands of combatants, air-power, long range artillery, fronts that are dozens of miles long, battles lasting days/weeks, etc. How would they handle submarine warfare, strategic bombing? In addition, there would be several thousand different unit types.

While they could probably get away with conflicts such as the American Civil War, Franco-Prussian War, Napoleonic wars, etc, for me, personally, the major attraction of the TW series is that they focus on eras/conflicts that receive relatively limited "treatment" in the computer gaming industry -- and, hence, I'd like to see them continue that trend.

-V

Anything, as long as it's free of bugs. If CA doesn't get paid to test it enough then release a frickin open beta!

You hear that?

RELEASE AN OPEN BETA

that should assuage any obvious bugs which we have the most delightful time of discovering 5 minutes after installing the game

Oh and more CA support on the forums; more accountability. I'd rather actually feel like teh developers are standing behind their game with smiling faces instead of hiding in a corner hoping and praying for mercy.

16th-18th Centuries

Medieval Total War 2 with:

many features from RTW
improved diplomacy and AI
diplomacy must have that offer screen
improved trade and more trade goods
more units
more factions

..........

For a campaign
Id like The entier world involved,
With eskimo warriors,
And australian aberigenees and stuff.
"you cant realy prove they dint exist, So idf like them in"

More diversety in units,
And restrictions to tech tree so not all people can build same
A historicaly acurat game "to some degree considering ive just added Eskimos and stuff"
Not set to any specific time period,
But at the same time Prety loyal to historical events,
"obviously if the french are already dead, Cant have A French specific event"
And Bring back the chess board movement of Shogun and MTW

Better music for ambiance, "it really can make or break a game"
STW battel feel.
But more of a MTW campaign map and economics controll.
Id like Rome TW type gfx. But also a option to drop down To the old STW gfx style for lower end users,

Many more historical battles, Whch also incorporate in to campaign mode,
I.e
if in May 1500 Some 1 had attaked osama. With a specific army In real life,
then they attack osama in campaign mode at that date with that specific army Just as in real life. Only difrence being The defending army "you" See how you would have coped with it when theres more to think about than Just win the battle,

Better ways of defending your ports, And blocking emnissarys From entering by upgrading, But also abilaty to train Better emnisarys or assasins exetera Who can get past the security,

More Upgrades and diftern boat units,
With Amount of crew on board a ship being a factor as to how many shots it can shoot or how quickly, So as to make a better nortical battle.

Abilaty to dictate unit size, Default size of 120 for instance,
But you decide you can oly afoard a unit of 58,
You should be able to Create a unit of 58,

4 turns in one year,

And a better trading system,
Allowing you to set the price you want for your goods,
And qualaty of workman ship, (poor workman ship = less wages for crafts men "yes they should be involved and so should salary)
So buyers would take in to concideration Price and qualaty then evaluate which was best value for money,
The computer ai should also be adjusting its prices to try and beat yours,
but the computer would not be able to find out how much you are selling your goods for Unless that particular faction has purchased goods from you or has a spy in your trading province, Or by word of mouth Several months after you changed your prices,
The same should apply to human players.

I spose i could go on and on :)
But I dont want Some 1 els to make a winner of a game from my ideas and make a fortune,
Becous id be prety Agrivated if i bought the game and said HEY thats what i said,.

Oh It should be called Ultimate Toatl war

ShambleS
:bow:

Maybe an imperialism TW; that could include the whole world.
And the battle maps should have more details. Trenches, Swamps, Hedges, Creeks ...
Weather should be as good as MTW, maybe with fog! ~:cool:

Aztecs TW , heh , that can be funny.

1. My wet dream: The Great Empires period, 1600-330bc, including facs like Egypt, Babylonia (Kassite), Mittani, Hittite, Assyria, Judah, Phoenicia, Urartu, Persia, Minoans, Nubians, Libyans etc etc and all the Mycenaean kingdoms of Greece etc. Basically a bronze age scenario spanning three disctinct periods/ parts.
2. or a Hellenic game divided into three parts; City states 800-500bc, Classical 500-356bc and finally Hellenistic 356-30bc much like HTW but on a much larger scale.
3. or maybe China although that game would IMO span a too lengthy period of time to be interesting.

Personally I´d like to create an Egyptian mod spanning from the unification ca. 3150bc to 525 bc when incorporated into the Assyrian empire/ or end with the New Kingdom at 1069 bc. This epic one should be divided into 5 distinct eras; Old-, Middle- and New Kingdom plus the 1st and 2nd Intermediate periods.

[SIZE=4]MESOPOTAMIA TOTAL WAR [/SIZE] starting with Sumeria and progressing thru to the twilight of the Assyrian Empire .

Unless we want a game similar to RTW, we need to avoid things like egypt total war or greek total war. It would be just an update of RTW. Unless if that’s what everybody wants...

I like that time period.

It's part of the reason I never got Medievil; I don't know much about the time period. It doesn't interest me.

Look at the Total War sequence...

STW: Begins in 1530
WI: Some starting positions in 1490
MTW: 1086 - 1492
VI: 798 - 1066
RTW: 272 bc - 41
BI: circa 360 - 590

I'm guessing something before R:TW then.
Maybe Greece: Total War, with Dorian Invasion expansion pack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xemitg

Unless we want a game similar to RTW, we need to avoid things like egypt total war or greek total war. It would be just an update of RTW. Unless if that’s what everybody wants...

---

Then, what have we left? Europe 1500-1800 ad? A Chinese TW? An american indian/ Atec/ Inca game? Or what? The main thing with the TW-series is to exploit and cover the main conflict periods in human history. I suggested a bronze age game just because it´s nothing like RTW at all. Warfare was very diffenrent and honor was a key element. Skirmishing is another key to ancient warfare not at all like the Roman era with organized warfare. I do realise that for people that finds history obsolete or dull this would be a bad choice.
My other suggestion regarding a game based around Egypt is just my personal flavour based on over 15 years of studying egyptology and I think it wouldn´t be that popular amongst the gaming community.
However, a TW-game covering the ancient empires that I suggested, roughly 2000-1000 bc, would be a killer IMO. Before the TW-series evolve into more modern warfare 15th, 16th, 17th centuries the game needs to be better, smarter AI, more complex reality settings like attrition, logistics etc etc. That the TW series would attempt to release a "modern" (18th and 19th cetury) warfare game would be the end of this great serie. There are to many good games covering this era already on the market.

I told u No specific time period,
Start form neanderthal man,
And work your way up.
at 4 turns per year with the game i described youd be Verry lucky to make it all the way thru to the sengoku jidai period.

ULTIMATE TOTAL WAR!!!!

BABYLON TOTAL WAR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Al Khalifah

Look at the Total War sequence...

STW: Begins in 1530
WI: Some starting positions in 1490
MTW: 1086 - 1492
VI: 798 - 1066
RTW: 272 bc - 41
BI: circa 360 - 590

I'm guessing something before R:TW then.
Maybe Greece: Total War, with Dorian Invasion expansion pack.

---

RTW: 270bc - 5 bc (It's definitely 270. I'm not sure about the 5 part; I made that up.)

I like Bronze Age.

I like sword and spear, not guns.

I don't want it.

I will only cost us more STW-players...:bigcry:

Well for something not done before, why not something along the lines of the carving up of Africa by the major European powers in the 19th century? This might give people a chance to play as natives or any one of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Ottomans etc. What you all think of that?

Or perhaps the Chinese colonies around the same period, Boxer rebellion et al?

Perhaps even Aztec/Inca TW would work, Cortez/Pizarro and associated cronies. They could happen like a scripted event like the Mongol invasion in MTW.

If it wasn't for AOE3, an American colonies TW might work ~:)

Atztec/Inca:TW is my second choice. The spanish invasion would offer aa unseen variety in gameplay.

Thanks for the input folks. I suppose I should pitch in with my own views - could be a long post, bear with me.

Era.

I would definitely like to see the post Medieval period explored covering:

# The Renaissance (Europe, 14th century - 16th century)
# Elizabethan period (United Kingdom, 1558 - 1603)
# The Age of Enlightenment Europe,18th century
# Napoleonic Era, 1799-1815

So I am talking an age of gunpowder, sea power, exploration, religious unrest and rebellion.

Name.

mmm tricky one. But Imperial TW? TW4:Empires, TW4: Conquest?

Geography.

There needs to be a global aspect here as world exploration and trade would have to be a major part. Obviously the scale is massive - you can't have a battle map for every part of the globe.

So I would still like to see the main focus of the game to be on an extended Europe.

The global aspect; exploration, colonies and distant power struggles could be handled as an abstraction; players allocate resources - troops, money, specific generals etc to handle this part of the game on behalf of the player. Progress could be handled in terms of reports coming in as well as treasure, new technologies and improved maps.

To handle this I would like to see the introduction of a new map level. Essentially a dynamic world map that develops over time.

At the start of the game the world map would be very inacurate a bit like this one from the 15th Century http://graphics.britannia.com/histor...fords/fram.jpg

As the game proceeds and your faction explores or trades maps with other nations the the quality of the map would improve. To something like this one from the 17th: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...pler-world.jpg

Other things I'd like to see in the game:

More diplomatic options - e.g. alliances that mean something and can last.

More espionage options - e.g. being able to spark, sponsor and assist rebels in enemy territories.

Tech tree - cartography, navigation and ship building tech trees + gun and canon tech. Also a tactical tech tree that would have an effect on battle field manoeuvres. For instance Barrack square 1; improves discipline & morale. Barrack square 2. Improves discipline, morale, stamina and allows troops to form a square. etc.

Turn sequence - I'd really like to do away with the turn sequence altogether. I'd rather have a fluid sliding scale that would slow down or speed up time. You would be able to see units moving round the map in "real" time. Things would come in and out of view depending on the proximity of scouts, line of site and ability of your units. Battles would be based on manoeuvring two or more armies together. Ideally you would see the armies and supply trains etc marching round Europe

Fog of war - I think that the way things are hidden til explored in RTW is good and should be enhanced in TW4.

Characterisation & role-play. Vices and virtues to the next level up. Choosing the right man for the job would be more important. Hidden vices perhaps? More plots and intrigue. Negotiations handled "in person" i.e. from your kings or generals perspective when an emissary visits, or from your emissaries perspective when he is granted an audience. With options of what to say and how to say it; from grovelling formalities to surly demands.

Internal conflict - more chance of rebellions, religious unrest, plots and civil wars. Bring back the disloyal generals, so we can set an example of them!

Sea battles. I'd really like to play these out but I can live with an improved abstracted version if need be.

Bigger battle maps - so we can have massive waterloo style battles. Blood, smoke, mud and carnage on the battlefield.

Multiplayer campaigns. Removing the turn sequence might make this more viable. Allow players to arrange weekly sessions for instance. Agree on a rate for the time slider and away you go. Absent players can set plans in place and would have to rely on AI.

Well that's about it for now, hope someone out there likes my ideas.

A Three Kingdoms with possible Mongol invasion add on, mod, etc. would make China would make an excellent topic. It is different than the others, could cover more time, include more difficult terrain, and would not be that hard to create, ie. cheap for the company.

I agree with many of the previous entries. A better AI, and greater gamout of responses in diplomacy. I for one always want to behead my losing generals, especially when the battle is won, and they run, and take everyone else with them. Why is that not an option? Another portion would be sandbox. Why not include a map maker, random, etc. and start with one province. In addition would like online strategic play, with yes, unfortunately uncommanded (auto) battles.

I like naval combat too, but it would not be as useful in this mod. Maybe riverboats mmmm. No not paddlewheelers, before I start taking shots across my rigging.

The Middle Kingdom could be a wonderful place to play, I mean fight, I mean conquer. I am sure I am not saying anything new, but there is my two ducals, oops wrong period.

The Original Barbarian King

TW1: Shogun
TW2: Mongol Invasion
TW3: MTW
TW4: Viking Invasion
TW5: RTW

So we want to go back in time and change Viking Invasion (incidentally the only one in the series I havn't played)...

I'd have to go with Imperial: TW covering the time from the Spanish Discovery of the Americas to roughly the end of the American Civil War/Franco-Prussian War. Although, I'd like to see a more realistic format, were things really were the way that they were, up until the point you decide to screw up history. I've seen enough of the Late BCs-1500s AD, and would like to move foreward instead of back.

I would Also Like to See

Completely Revamped Trade System: If you're nation can produce it, you can trade things with other nations for it.

Completely Revamped AI: I would like to see an AI that actually learns from it's mistakes, and forms it's own complex battle plans for each individual nation, according to what kinds of units it has available to it.

Completely Revamped Diplomacy Model: Meaning, instead of sending around a Diplomatic Agent, you can just click which faction you want to have a diplomatic deal with, whatever the distances from your capital to their capital, determines how long it will take to get your message there and back.

No More Turns!: I'd like to see a game, that doesn't use a turn based system, this would allow players to be on their toes at all times. It takes a certain amount of in game time to construct new buildings within cities, or train new units, in real time. Also, this would allow for realistic marching distances between cities.

Assigning Governors to foreign provinces: Because the Scope of the Game is so large, you can actually Assign Governors to take care of domestic issues in your far away provinces. This includes building up your Colonies, and raising foreign levies. This would allow you to manage whatever aspect of the game that you want (trade, military Expeditions, and Diplomacy), while you're governors are doing all the little important things in the background, that are relatively unimportant to you, but vastly important to your nations success. Also, Governors would gain traits over time that would either be good or bad for sed province... this includes all out rebellion.

Map of the World: The entire world would be represented, and with it, every major, and many minor civilization with it, each with unique units, and military, or cultural doctrines.

Religion: Bring God to the Savages, or re-populate areas with citizens of your own ilk. This includes things like Inquisitions, and dare I say it... genocide. This would greatly upset other nations that are not of the same thought-process, or religion that you are, and they may even declare war outright war.

Complex Campaigns: This includes supply lines and attrition, and when you march your armies into enemy territories you can assign them certain missions, including raising farms, and small communities, or attempting to sack the provincial capital, you may also order your general in command to take a defensive position, or seek your enemies offensively. If a battle ensues, it is completely up to you to take command, but if you don't, and the General under control of the AI has good command traits, you may well win the day, without taking atrocious losses.

Improved Battle Controls: If you take over command of your troops, you are no longer god and can't see everything. The Battles are fairly first person... and some 3rd Person. You can order cavalry to screen your line, or poke at enemy offensive or defensive positions to find out where they are the weakest. You only know what you're up against until the enemy is right in your sight. Of course with advent of later technology, things like air balloons, and good telescopes will be available at your disposal. Basically, your underlings do the fighting for you, you tell them where to go, and where to attack, and the AI would figure out the rest. This would mean that you might get frustrated with a fresh lieutenant that doesn't know exactley what he's doing, but with time, and if he doesn't die, he'll learn to do things that will put an edge on the enemy.

Chaos Theory and Corealis Affect: The rotation of the Earth, geologic location, and position of the planet vs. the sun... mean seasonal changes, according to time and location, Barometric Pressure, Humidity, and Elevation. Also things like Weather Patterns develop regularly that you can use to your advantage... or your enemies will know how to use to theirs.

Hmmmm.... can't really think of too many other things... Naval Battles, going along the same line, as my Improved Battle Controls suggestion would be nice though too.

Wazikashi

Hopefully: Colonisation: Total War (Picking up where MTW left off and going through to 1800(ish) - This would let me live out my dream of being born during this period with memories of the future, hindsight = Me saying "Longbow > Musket God damn it!")

Realistically: Hellenistic: Total War. (Rome engine with new skins, a few little features and maybe the Indus - Yawn - Unless its expansion was the Roman struggle for dominance of the Italian peninsular)

Alternatively: MMORPG: Total War (Strictly profit I'd expect)

--

Can't help but think of it though - Setting off from Spain with a small fleet to fight the exotic and mysterious peoples of the Americas and taking home huge amounts of loot, with constant skirmishes with other Catholic powers, possibly a high speed chase around Cape Horn where the sink rate is 99% ~D ~D.

Some other brilliant features which would add huge amounts of realism:

1. Different stages of war/aggressiveness, ie: total tar, skirmishes, war at sea/distant provinces. Total war is and was a rare thing, look at the Falkland Islands - Strictly provincial and wasn't total war, these things happen and I'd love it to be incorporated into the TW games.

2. Looting after battles! Why not?! It happened! Not only gold and valuables, but also weapons and armour - the game could translate this to weapon/armor upgrades like those of the armouries built in provinces. The amount and quality depending on the slain enemy, however.

3. Further enhanced diplomacy. Use your imagination, I'm talking ultimatums, pacts over territories ("You invade Belgium, and I'll invade you!" sort of thing) and many others.

4. Lots more which I can't think of off the top of my head! ~D ~D

Total War games really do have unlimited potential, if CA could only tap into even a quarter of it in the next game, it would easily drive me crazy like the previous titles ~:cheers:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PseRamesses

1. My wet dream: The Great Empires period, 1600-330bc, including facs like Egypt, Babylonia (Kassite), Mittani, Hittite, Assyria, Judah, Phoenicia, Urartu, Persia, Minoans, Nubians, Libyans etc etc and all the Mycenaean kingdoms of Greece etc. Basically a bronze age scenario spanning three disctinct periods/ parts.
2. or a Hellenic game divided into three parts; City states 800-500bc, Classical 500-356bc and finally Hellenistic 356-30bc much like HTW but on a much larger scale.
3. or maybe China although that game would IMO span a too lengthy period of time to be interesting.
.

---

Agreed pseRamesses ,the bronze age scenario would be an excellent idea
an important era as its an important era in the cradle of civilisation of mesepotamia
of this period i would like to see the movement of peoples through territories
which happened in this period

I think that anything post 1500 is hopeful; I think things would be too complex politicaly to do the era justice. Also I personnally think warfare becomes less apt for the TW style after the medirval period.

What I would like is for them to take RTW as it is, keep the engine, graphics, world map etc but make into another medieval setting. Then spend 2 years fashioning the most intricate, perfect AI and political mechanics ever seen, then spend another 6 months giving the whole thing a graphical once over etc.

Don't see a problem with the RTW engine and graphics, just needs things like supply lines, a complex marriage/family tree sytem (if it was set in the middle ages again) and most of the other things people have said, but the key I reckon would be the AI.

What I would want would be.......

Total war: reloaded
I would like this to totally revamp every TW game, ever. The company would listen to the fan base, org, twc, the lot to make Tw games perfect. all mods would help the company, for skinning and the like.

Conclusion: sorry but this will take 100 years!~D

Well, personally, I haven't seen any fandom-based game successful ~:)

First we have to decide what essential characteristics of TW series are. Based on the summary, then we can plot out at least the new era.

To me, fundamental things a TW game must have are:
-Multi-state map.
-Turbulent diplomacy.
-Game functions at both strategic level and tactical level - hence operations are crucial.
-Hand-to-hand combat. At least soldiers have to be able to form a unit-on-map. So machine-gun battles are ruled out!
-Economy to manage.
-It must be logical! You cannot expect full operations from West Indian tribes!

From the aforementioned criteria, I suggest the following options of periods:
-China at virtually any time in the past! It had always been an unstable state under monarchies.

-India: some BC time. A perfect multi state which was constantly under threat of civil wars and invasions.

-Mongol Total War: why not a full version of the Mongol hordes fighting each other and then conquer the rest of the world?

-Islam Total War: well, truly wars between states of different Islamic sects are worth a terrific attempt. Umayyad, Abbasid and Mameluks and the like!

-Some other minor conquests in history like that by Tamerlane, Attila, etc.

My two cents :bow:

I want to have the option to save during battles!

I don't care when or where the game is set. It could honestly be Rugby:Total War for all I care but it needs one key ingredient!

A really good AI!

I must agree with Satyr - A challenging AI must be the number 1 component of a new game.

It must also have a feel and atmosphere appropriate for the setting.

Fantastic advances have been made with the graphics and I'd like to see that continue forward.

Further improvements in the diplomatic options and perhaps an option to requip your armies as you see fit.

Pick a quality level of the basic soldier, choose his armor, weapons, and equipment. So you can tailor your army specifically to your particular need.

They have been taking small steps forward on the sea. I'd like to see a bold leap and wonderfully rendered ships we watch moving across the water into battle. Complete with fire, arrows and boarding. Naval battles could be fought on the ocea, lakes, rivers, and canals.

I would enjoy most any setting. China at 3 kingdoms or probably prior, Something before 1500 BC, or a unique fantasy game. Whatever the ultimate setting I'd love to see it.

My biggest wants have to be an AI capable of surprising me or at least adapting to my tactics. If I'm heavy on cav maybe my foe should persue higher spear recruitment and adapt field formations that favor a spear focus.

That and naval battles.


They have been improving or working to improve on every other issue I want to see improved on the game. So hats off and wallet open to the future of Total War.

My personal request would be a Greek focused game, i.e the peloponnesian war etc. however i dont really mind what time period they go for next time as long as the following features are included.

Improved Battlefield AI
More depth to negotiations
Naval Battles(If imperial glory can have em, then why not total war?)
Loyalty feature from medieval(i liked spying on my generals to discover who was plotting against me)
Civil wars^^^ that pretty much goes hand in hand with the loyalty thingy :)
Factions Re-emerging
Multiplayer campaign

I personally would like MTW2!!! It's my fav TW and also my fav game!!!

Here are my favourite options:

1. Medieval Total War 2
2. Ancient: Total War
3. China: Total War(Three Kingdoms)

I would like to see either a Renaisance TW - say 1450 - 1650 ish - loads of technical advance and lots of religious action with the reformation or a 19th century TW - say 1792 - 1900 - again - technical advance and lots of conflicts to spice things up - you could even abstract the colonies and impact of things like the american civil war. ~:cheers:

Folks, let's see if we can get through to page 3 of this topic without the needless shouting (overly-large text, multiple exclamation points, etc). Consider your audience, the readers.

Thanks. :bow:

@Kurt Renaisance TW

That make's sense to me.

"technical advance and lots of conflicts to spice things up" absolutely. And not just technical advances either - new weapons needed new tactics. Available tactics should be available to those factions who invest in it. It's a whole new tech-tree.

Endless opportunity for diplomacy, trade, treachery and Machiavellian scheming.

Also ripe the for the periods afterwards, and numerous expansion possibilities. Gunpowder please!

Also warming to the idea of the Three Kingdoms China ideas. Ancient has been done IMO - it's called Rome TW. I'm sure Rome is moddable down-tech much better than up-tech.

You mean we aren't writing this as advice to CA? Come on now, of course we are.

Sure...they read here too. Let's not shout at them. I'm absolutely certain they're interested.

Bribing should be changed. It should not be possible to bribe FMs or other loyal troops. But it should be possible to bribe mercs that serve the enemy even before a battle.
You should also be able to have joined actions with your allies. It should be possible to coordinate plans and to exchange units.

The issue is that the melee era of warfare is more or less covered, and that leaves the age of muskets, rifles, and then modern warfare (Napoleonic wars, American Civil War, and then the wars to follow), with the first two easilY done with the engine (The crudest form of this exists with the gunners in STW) and I don't think TW engine really is appropriate for modern-warfare (WW1 and beyond)
I would not be surprised if a TW comes out covering the Napoleonic Wars, which would be great except for one thing. The game's 3d warfare would be crap in compare, because of the lack of variety in units and the sheer simplicity of Napoleonic warfare tactics would make it rather boring in compare to the previous three games. That means the game has to find a way to really improve the strategy side of the game, which is really hard to do and most people will not appreciate it. If such a game comes out, I expect the reviews will all say the fighting sucks and that's that. A game about the Civil War would be similarly compromised, though I can think of a few things that might give it more flavour. If anything, the scale of the fighting would be an issue because Napoleonic armies numbered in the tens of thousands. If you think it hard to control 2,000 men in RTW, imagine controlling 50,000.
In my opinion, the TW series has run its course because the engine relies on formation fighting, and after the Civil War, formation warfare begins to fade, and if we push too far back in time, we fight there is nothing new or different enough to be worthwhile. Now, if they have released a Napoleonic game first, then Shogun, Medieval, and Rome, it would have been better.

1750s-1920s

And, like AOE or a game like that, your faction will upgrade it's technologies and older units will become obsolete. Also, units should automatically lose men and disband with age; you can't really expect a single unit of 40 hastati to survive for 85 years without at least retraining, even if they've never been in battle. Surely they're going to get old and die.

That is another issue, which is that the conflict between using seasonal and yearly turns. In my opinion, seasonal turns are much more realistic, but I can how the issue of time can be hard for some players. In STW, 16 years, the age of an heir coming of age, is 64 turns, and the life-span of a king can stretch over 200 turns. Also, lots of people had a hard time thinking around the idea of income coming in every 4 turns, not every turn.
If a game was seasonal in turns, then certain units, and I do mean only certain, can disband automatically, but if it is yearly, then I would not want it to be so, for the armies which could have taken years and years to building up correctly (due to other flaws of the strategy map) will have a very short shelf-life, and it is not going to be popular if you build up this great army and suddenly half the men "get old." That is a sure way to turn people away from the game.
Myself, I want three things to be different next game. Instead of a county/province production screen, I want it so that every building in a province has its own production queue. so instead of only one unit at a time being built in a province each turn, you can rig it so that at the bowyer, one archer is building, at the swordsmith, a unit of swordsmen, at the horse-breeder, some hobilars, and at the spear-smith, an armoured spearmen unit, and after one turn, ALL 4 units appear at once in the same province during the same turn (if their production times allow). This way, it is on a more realistic timescale to build armies.

1) I don't care too much what the era is, as long as the game is polished, as bug-free as possible and well supported after release

2) The diplomacy needs to be greatly improved upon. Even just copying the system from games as old as Alpha Centauri (7 years old!) would be an improvement. That game had "trustworthyness" ratings, so you couldn't make and break alliances on a whim. Each faction had a rating for how much it liked/disliked other factions based upon what style of government they had, how they behaved towards them, how aggressive they were, what your core values were etc. You had several levels of diplomatic relations from all out war to a kind of vassalship. You could loan money, give away provinces and units, co-ordinate tactics, trade tech (for tech, money, land etc). Considering it was a contempary of Shogun, its diplomatic game is far in advance of the TW series.

3) Much better empire management. As we all know, once your TW empire reaches a certain size, running your empire becomes a very long-winded and often tedious task. Most of my MTW games I've stopped playing after about 100 years as I can't be bothered with all the micro-management. Others have in the past pointed out the ways that games like Civ, CTP, SMAC etc handle empire managent in a more efficient way

4) Much better information management. From day 1 of MTW I felt that the info management was clunky and didn't give anywhere near enough info. Things like being able to see ALL your unit leaders, not just your stack leaders and order them by each attribute. See point 3

5) More rebellions/civil wars. More powerful generals and generals of Royal blood making a bid for power, especially with a weak king. If your King dies without an heir, rather than the game ending, having your most powerful generals battle it out for power

6) Keep the epic nature of the game, keep those wonderful epic, see-saw battles, the ones that we remember years and years later (did I ever tell you about the time I was playing as clan Mori and I was attacked by an army of 2000 Yari Ashiguru and 2000 Warrior Monks....). We all love TW games for those special battles :charge: :duel: :bow:

7) Atmosphere, atmosphere, atmosphere. I think most people would agree that STW had the best atmosphere. It was so lovingly crafted, and the game was just dripping in the ambience of medieval Japan. Not that the other 2 were bad, but Shogun takes the cake.

8) I know I said I didn't care what era, but I would prefer Napoleonic. If this Napoleonic game could include the whole world a la EU2, then so much the better, but I think that would be a layer of complexity too far. If TW4 does become NTW, then perhaps the expansion could be the American Civil War, which only having 2 sides would be ideal for the holy grail of TW games, the multiplayer campaign.

The issue is that not all players, and indeed most players, do not have the mind-set to appreciate the dimplomatic and strategic side of the game. If the company is going to make a game, it cannot just fine-tune it for the small set of players who appreciate and long for the kind of dimplomacy and such as you describe, or else the game will not sell well enough to justify its cost.
With regards to Napoleonic warfare, the issue is that it is fun and cool to us, but, and this is a big but, the fighting would be very simple and crude in compare to the kind of action we see on Medieval or Rome. There are only 4 types of soldier you are likely to find, a musket-armed infantryman, light cavalry, heavy cavalry, and riflemen (This is not including the arabs and turks, but history shows that it is not smart to use medieval era Mamelukes against European volley-fire). The only major variation on this would be that the French would have the Imperial Guards, perhaps some Highlander infantry for the English )(which are again little more than slightly more aggressive musketeers), and then the tiny difference between the countries. French infantry were historically faster, more flexible, but less disciplined than Prussians, who were much slower, very rigid, and so on. Russians would have to have Cossacks, that is a given, but their infantry musketry was terrible, and their favoured tactic was to use massed bayonette charges, with obvious results. In short, I don't think players used to variety and complexity of Medieval and Roman warfare would be so quick to appreciate the simplicity of Napoleonic warfare. It would just too different for most players' tastes.
One thing, though, that I think would be a great help is to add in a climatization factor for troops. Soldiers would fight differently in certain terrains and climates. Instead of just saying "an armour of 5 makes you tired faster in the desert" a "poor in desert" marker on the unit would say that it is one point of speed slower, tired (at least) 25% faster, and minus 1 or more morale points. A unit that is "good in desert" would gain a plus 1 speed, tire 25% slower, and + 1 morale. Something like that would greatly improve the dynamics of the battlefield. Viking units in MTW or in RTW, Germanic tribesmen types, would be at home in winter, while other units would be cold, tired, and miserable. Those from the desert would REALLY miserable, cold, and tired. That way, you don't have Mamelukes from the deserts of Algeria or Carthaginians fighting as well in the snows of the Alps as they do in the sunny grasslands of central Italy.
Another feature I want is a "sneak" feature. Units that can conceal in the open can move slowly without being detected (or at least with little chance of it) so that ambushes can be mor readily controlled.

BM+V, have you tried the Napoleonic mod for NTW? They've got more than 4 unit types ~;)
Furthermore, I don't feel the need for a game to have hundreds of units for it to be interesting, one of my favourite things about Shogun is that it only has around a dozen units, all of which have a use, and are wonderfully balanced in a rock/paper/scissors kind of way.

As for the Napoleonic era, it would be a hugely popular subject (how many copies has Cossacks sold?) especially in continental Europe where this kind of thing is massive (EU2 for example).

I disagree with the simple diplomacy I suggested being "too complicated" for the average player. I just copied the system from Alpha Centauri which was a hugely successful game.


I also forgot to add my final point

9) Supply and attrition. Maintaining a supply of food/water/ammunition/pay for your armies should at least be a factor. If your supply lines suffer, then disease and desertion should increase in your armies

What I meant by four unit types is that there is little genuine difference between a French infantryman and a Russian one. That was one of the defining features of "Napoleonic" warfare, in that it was really just a simple matter of 50,000 men carrying muskets and bayonettes, marching up to an army of 50,000 other guys with the same weapons and only slightly different uniforms, firing volleys at each other and maybe charging with bayonettes. In the end, the guy with more men usually won, and any occasion where the guy with fewer troops won, it was because his enemy made some hideous mistake which cannot be explained logically.
However, I agree, that it would be a good game, but I am simply noting that I imagine that the difference between it and the sheer variety of the previous games will turn quite a few players off. I known many people who loved STW but found MTW to be too "different" for their tastes. The difference between this game and the previous three would be considerable to say the least.
And just to add, one shouldn't put too much into what Europeans think with regards to games, because in the end, the people who really decide the gaming industry are the Asians and Americans, as they are the biggest markets by far. Also, to be honest, Europeans tend to have more depth and appreciation for historical games than the average American (but I am sure most of the Americans here are of a higher standard than the average). This observation is based entirely upon personally having lived in both Europe and the United States, and is not intended as an insult to Americans, only an appreciation for cultural differences. In all honesty, Europeans can be a bit of a bore in compare to Americans, so it's all equal in the end. :scastle:

In terms of era, I don't particularly care. Pike and shot would be great...but why on earth would anyone want to be someone besides Sweden?

Graphics, scmaphics, I don't care. The game looks great as it is. There was very little change in graphics between STW and MTW right?

My main thing, as has been said before, is an improved AI, both tactical and strategic. It does not have to be Hannibal, or heck Gaius Julius, but please, for the love of God, give me an AI that my sister can't beat!

Azi

I think we all agree on the point of improved AI.

I think we also agree proper atmosphere makes for a game that feels finished and ready for hours of play. It is essential to establishing mood and making a game memorable.

To any developers out there tell the people who guard the purse strings this is an essential part of building value in a product.


That said, can somebody back me up on naval battles? It is has been discussed in the past but I'm not seeing so much anymore. Rome quality graphics with tri and biremes ducking it out....

That would be a fight worth zooming in on. Frankly it would look good from high above too.

Is there a second for the seas as the new battle frontier?

An extra difficulty level

Easy/Medium/Hard/Very Hard/Org'ah ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shambles

For a campaign
Id like The entier world involved,
With eskimo warriors,
And australian aberigenees and stuff.
"you cant realy prove they dint exist, So idf like them in"

---

I'm working on somthing like that for the current game - including eras (I think someone mentioned those), and a global system - , though if they made it as a new game with a new uber engine that would be best of all!

I think a game covering the entire world at no specified time would really suck. They just can't give it the same kind of details they could give it to a game in a specified country or region at a specified time. Many say STW had the best 'ambiance'. That's because it only covered one nation at a much specified time. In R-TW there are many nations but only during antiquity and already they had trouble to make all nations well playable and accurate beside Romans (and even for them...).

I doubt the next game go Aztec or Inca. Not enough known. I, personally, have no idea what warfare looked like, there, before the Spanish conquest. It's really not a popular setting and frankly, it's of no interest for most of us who are of European origin.

I fear a China Total War would only be a STW with a bigger map. Not enough variety.

I agree the game needs a better ai, a better diplomacy. I would like it to be easier to make peace with another nation. To have a reputation and have leaders have a personality, not just declare you a total war because your land appears no enough defended. Have alliance actually means something (for honourable opponents).

I think a colonisation era game would be really interesting. You could be the Vice-Roi for the colony and wage war against the native (Indian tribes, South American empire) and other European colonies. You could hire native auxiliary to help your troops, build forts, new cities. Actually "establish" the province borders instead or having them established right from the start. It was a new land after all. You would need to supply your troops with powder and cannonball (which would make forts far more important than they are in RTW, as they would act as a spot where you can re-supply your troops).

I think that could make a wonderful game.

Back to the original:
New Shogun Total War.
And this time no silly unhistoric things like geisha and ninjas, only 8 nation, having a distinct cavalry unit, stupid movies.

A total war whole world game; do you realize how much hardrive space and memory that would use up? I mean, imagine the tech, Rome by itself would have about, what, 3-4 different tech trees?

I don't see how a China: total war would be just another STW with a bigger map; China and Korea had really unique units. It would also be better for the terrain would be more varied, meaning more varied factions with more unit variety and tactics.

I would definitely want them to make a worldwide total war, but I don't know how high the system requirements would be, and I know for sure that my computer right now wouldn't be able to handle it.

What year would this worldwide total war start and when would it end?

And this time no silly unhistoric things like geisha and ninjas, only 8 nation, having a distinct cavalry unit, stupid movies.

Geisha, Ninjas, and 8 clans are not as unhistoric as you think. The only thing really out of whack is the Geishas, and that is only insofar as they were not historically used on the same scale as the game does. If you want to complain about unhistoric, the way Samurai fought is not the way they do it in the game, but to realistically depict samurai warfare would really just be too confusing and complicated.
There were 8 major clans that had major historical impact, and to a limited degree, the unit specialization is correct (Mori clan was famed for its adherence to Buddhism, and thus warrior monks did serve in greater numbers with them).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSEG

Back to the original:
New Shogun Total War.
And this time no silly unhistoric things like geisha and ninjas, only 8 nation, having a distinct cavalry unit, stupid movies.

---

The ninja movies were the coolest part!

And by making Geishas so powerful you were forced to devote significant resources to that technological development.

Besides there are mods in development for the VI and Rome engines

ichi :bow:

Like others I'd rather see them go back farther in time rather than go forward. TW:Bronze Age or TW:Stone age. Only possible exception to that maybe would be Meso-American where they have the North, Central, and South American version. Include the Incas, Aztecs, Mayas, Hopis, and etc. Have the cut off just before the Spainiards arriving to the new world. Something like that would be cool I think. Leave the post-gunpowder weapons out of it. ~:cheers:

I agree with the ones that want another go in the Medieval period.
A Medieval TW2 with the Rome: TW engine... what a treat that would have been!!! :charge:
Another wish would be Crusades: TW

A china total war seems to be the greater choice and would be great especially during the warring states period but maybe a different look at ancient kingdom around the south east asia (vietnam , cambodia area now) or during the 14th-15th century which includes old malaccan sultanate and the coming of western power such as dutch , portugeese and english .

China: Total War is an excellent idea. The 7 Kingdoms' period is one of the most interesting times of history.

I also prefer pre-machines eras. This also stands for hand-held guns.

But what I really would like to play: the whole ancient times, with all of Eurasia, and North Africa, from the first great cultures to the dark ages, Arthur's times, perhaps. 2000 B.C. - 1000 B.C. - 1000 A.D.

China: Total War is an excellent idea. The 7 Kingdoms' period is one of the most interesting times of history.

I also prefer pre-machines eras. This also stands for hand-held guns.

But what I really would like to play: the whole ancient times, with all of Eurasia, and North Africa, from the first great cultures to the dark ages, Arthur's times, perhaps. 2000 B.C. - 1000 B.C. - 1000 A.D. The greatest empires the world have seen.... And the greatest men....

I rekon a world total war would be great if you had like 3 or 4 different campaigns for different parts of the world.

For North America you could have the civil war or something like that

For South America you could have the Aztecs and Incas and have a Spanish invasion

For Europe you could have the Napoleon era or something like that

For China you could have the 3 kindoms period

and i'm sure there are tons of other possibilities as well

I wouldn't like a worldwide total war. It's just too much land to cover. Campaigns would just take way too long to finish. I don't want to have to spend 1000 hrs to beat it once.

bah...can't edit my post

add-on to the above:
I'd be more interested in a Total War in the Americas. They haven't done anything in the Americas have they? Maybe everyone thinks its a boring part of history because everyone's studied it too much in school?

It could cover both South and North America. It would cover all the ancient peoples, then have Spanish Conquest, then continue with the Britain and French fight for North America. There could be multiple campaigns. One for each major period. The total time period would be like 1400-1776AD stopping at American history that everyone knows about.

i Reckon Total War: Timelord would be good as you could start as a small tribe any where in the world and play right the way into the futre.

in it would be:

playable plane/ship/spaceship battles
religions you could make up
weapon creating
mines
alien invasions

Isle of Man: Total War
Set in the time of Bartix, the Smegs pack up and leave while the urANIANs invade with the help of the no-tailed Cats.....Bartixian Stickmen try and help but are overrun
Will you defend your territory as the Smeg Legions
Attack the weak Smegs as the urANIANs or the No-tailed Cats
Run around in circles screaming MY MOTHER WAS A GOOSE EGG?(then you may need help)

ISLE OF MAN: TOTAL WAR (copyright of the bartix thread and Bartix: Total War)

Personally, I would love to see Medieval: Total War with the Rome: Total War engine.

Whatever the next game is, I would like it to be more complex strategic map-wise. Let the players decide what to export and import. Let people control rations. Also, the "take the city and control the entire region" has to go. There is more to controlling a province than just holding the main city. Also, is one city per province really that realistic? Other than that, the battles system also needs fixing. Right now the units are very difficult to control. Sometimes they walk onto the bridge when you order them to stand next to it, etc... Horse also suck at chasing down routers. It's like they are trying to go "with" the routing army rather than just chage past them or engage in individual combat. That is another thing. Why not just have different modes for units? One for fighting, one for charging through and one for exterminating (against routing units)? Naval battles (player-controlled) are obviously a must, as well. Also, captain selection needs to be improved in the future game. Prisoner-taking is a must. Also, siege battles need to be fixed since right now soldiers have trouble going through gates (they walk out in some straight line, getting into some odd formation beforehand).

Edit: And I am just getting started. Rome: Total War is swarming with bugs and problems. Granted, the game is quite complex and problems are expected to arise. For example, the whole overpopulation thing prevents people from upgrading farms. Well, I was thinking, why not just export the food from a Latifundia in Carthage to, say, Viscus Gothi? So, instead of getting 30,000+ rebellious people in carthage and 800 in gothi, I can have carthage decline to a reasonable 24,000 while Viscus Gothi grows into a minor city at increased speed. Again, I'm just picking problems off the top of my head. The TW designers need to sit down and think hard before creating another game. It is just disappointing to see such an epic game with great replayability value get bogged down because it wasn't polished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slon

Prisoner-taking is a must.

---

Hostages and ransoms would be pretty cool to add.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slon

Also, siege battles need to be fixed since right now soldiers have trouble going through gates (they walk out in some straight line, getting into some odd formation beforehand).

---

Yeah, I hate how archers tend to keep running towards the gate and try to get through it BEFORE attempting to launch arrows. I mean, they are clearly within range. Don't tell me they can't shoot over the walls.

An america mod would be hard.

North america was composed of MANY tribes that would all have roughly the same units.

The best america won would be

Age of Revolution: Total War/ Colonies: Total War

This could be at the time of americas revelution. England would have many was, france would have a very rebelous populace and americans would have to fight for their freedom and fight the native americans.

The european powers could also fight to keep their various teritories.