Trait: Dislikes Gunpowder

[cambovenzi]

im with ATPG.
never was a big fan of the guns in the total war games.
all the great sword fighting was part of what made the battles different than other games.
guns kind of ruin it.

i told my brother about the game.
and he goes: "isnt that the stand in a line and shoot era"?
and i go "yea..."
hopefully empire will still be really great tho.

[AussieGiant]

To me this period is one of the most unique in history when it comes to armed conflict.

It really was a transition period between ancient and modern based forms of warfare.

Cavalry was still relevant and a key component of any army. They were certainly not the dominant force of the past but in the right circumstances still devastating. Infantry in loose order or simply not deployed in a "square formation" are vulnerable to cavalry.

Light Cav had a massive role in scouting and screening movement while heavy cav and lancer regiments would still wreck havoc on infantry that were unprepared.

In fact the period was one of them most clear paper, rock, scissors equations ever.

Infantry were vulnerable to cavalry unless in cover or in square formation.

In square formation, infantry were immobile and extremely vulnerable to cannon and musket fire.

Cannon's without cavalry or infantry support were vulnerable to fast moving counter cavalry.

etc etc

In addition gunpowder, while effective, had not reduced all engagements to purely ranged combat. The need for sword skills and the ability to fight effectively in hand to hand combat was still an essential and common part of warfare.

I've read so many accounts of commanders having to make very tough decisions in order to survive and win in a variety of situations. It really is excellent.

The combined arms of cavalry, infantry and cannon gave any commander the best chance of success.

That is not to say this was an absolute but if one side had all units at it's disposal it would have an excellent advantage.

I'm greatly looking forward to the game and really excited about how this time period will translate in the Total War series.

[Polemists]

If you saw the recent land battle trailer I think you can see there will be plenty of exciting hand to hand combat going on. Plus even the naval simulation side has boarding action. So there's no reason you can't see lots of sword fight, and from what the trailer showed the sword fighting looks far better then MTW2, so there you go

I do hope that after this they will redo shogun or rome, but sadly I fear they may go the way of the mainstream into WW 1 or WW 2. *Sigh*

[Sir Beane]

I do hope that after this they will redo shogun or rome, but sadly I fear they may go the way of the mainstream into WW 1 or WW 2. *Sigh*

I think I have to disagree here. I very much doubt CA will ever try for WW1 or WW2. The market is over saturated, whereas their current market has almost no competition. Added to that is the fact that CA's game mechanics will not translate well to a game featuring artillery with ranges of several miles, fighter planes and huge wings of bombers, armoured vehicles etc....

How would CA model a battle like the Somme? Millions on each side, everyone spending days and days in trenches and occasionally making a run into no man's land just to be shot dead instantly by a machine gun nest? WW1 and WW2 were wars of attrition featuring numbers of soldiers CA will not get close to being able to represent for years.

So good luck for those of us who want them to go back in time and give us another Rome I guess. I wouldn't worry about WW1 or WW2. Personally I think the next game might either head for Asia or head into the realms of fantasy or steampunk sci-fi. Or Medieval 3.

[knoddy]

havnt read all the posts, but im a def disliker of gun powder too, i was not paying any attention to ETW, cos i didnt like the time period, BUT having looked at the screenies and watched the movies, im loving it now and def gunna have to get me a copy :)

[ThePianist]

Hopefully not fantasy or sci-fi

Rome can be made again, with more detail. The imperial time between 14AD and 363AD were skipped, so was the time between 476AD and 1453AD.

There is also all the land between the China and Caspian Sea, which is several times the size of Europe. Central Asia, India, Persia, Arabia and Caucasus. There was plenty of history going on between 550BC and 1914AD in that region.

There is also the time between 1453AD (generally taken as the end of medieval era) and 1700, the start of ETW. There is also plenty of history in between.

[Polemists]

Yes, but if you read any of the interviews they've hinted at wanting to try something *New* with the empire total war engine. (Meaning Modern, Sci Fi, or fantasy)

Of course maybe we will get lucky and they will just let another company buy the engine and divert that money into Shogun 2 :P

[Thermal]

ive never been keen on guns in other total war games because...well there quite useless, however, with most land warfare beening based around gunpowder we can only hope the CA have made gunpowder more lethal and awe-aspiring to watch...

[CrossLOPER]

Unless Gatling guns are going to be ridiculously easy to acquire in v1.0, I don't see the problem.

[fenir]

Personally, I don't think CA will do a Sci-fi game. Simply because it's not their market.

Most of CA's customers are not sci-fi people. We enjoy a period of history, that we have the ability to replay, and change to our own liking.

However, I do not believe that CA will not take the game into the WWI or WWII era. There will of course be lots of changes, but there is not reason the game cannot or should not go there.

Sincerely


fenir

[DisruptorX]

WW2 games have been done to death. A game based on WW1 would be a cool diversion, however. Fantasy, though, yuck. Unless they get their hands on the Warhammer license or something, generic fantasy is anything but fantastic. Sci-fi is even more boring.

[Ja'chyra]

At first I wasn't too impressed with the choice of era apart from the naval battles which I think will be great, but after thinking about it I fail to see how this era can be any more or less tactical than others as all the same components are there like range, melee, mobility, artillery the only thing that changes is the use of each. I don't believe this will be just stand and shoot any more than M2TW was just charge and hack. Even the strategic level will remain similar although with different aims and goals, hopefully logistics will play a bigger part in this game as an army shouldn't be allowed to be kept in the field indefinately.

As for the next game after ETW, fantasy would be cool if done right but if they follow the pattern it'll be M3TW.