What do we want from the next Total War game?

[feelotraveller]

To local I'm afraid. I'm totally won over for a Chinese setting.

Yes, it amazes me that the 5 kingdoms period remains untouched.

Alternatively India has not been done either...

Rome, again, ... zzzzzzzz

[jaspritsingh]

Alternatively India has not been done either...

India ... India can be set in multiple time frames

1. Mughals coming to India, introducing firearms and taking on local rulers.

2. India dividing into multiple factions - Awadh, Bengal, Maratha, Rajputana and a smaller but still potentially dangerous Mughal Empire with the Europeans showing up kinda like in Shogun - giving tech but not directly involved

3. Mughal Empire's end Era when the Mughal Emperor ruled only in Delhi, vassals were independent. East India Company had taken over Bengal, Madras and Bombay. Invaders from Persia and Afghanistan Raiding regularly.

Any of these 3 eras can make a great game with multiple factions with varied techs and units spread across a time frame of 100-120 years

[Nerdymidgetkid]

Rome 2. I will not settle for anything else. I don't care what the CA want to do, because they should have done Rome 2 instead of both Empire and Napoleon, not sure about Shogun as I haven't played it yet. However, everybody has been asking for Rome 2 for a long time and the CA have not listened, but instead made 2 crappy games that nobody likes. I would not play Aztec total war. Viking mythology would be fun but I don't think it is viable for the CA to make a non-historic game. No, Rome 2 is the answer.

Does anyone remember seeing this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IKlVS9k2gc and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3y0tvky5Iw

for Rome? I did, after I played the game, and I wondered why oh why the game hadn't looked like that. Well, now the CA have no excuse, as the technology now exists to get those graphics. When I watched this today getting the links it was different. It didn't seem so good. I think this must mean these graphics are not so incredible any more, and the time has come for CA to make these into a game. Men should also shout "To the Walls!"

My ideas:

Different recruiting forms! The Barbarians did not fight like the Romans, though they did in Rome total war. They also should not form their armies like the Romans. I think the Barbarian factions should be able to "Call to arms" which raises all the possible men. Level of recruits is determined by veterans and facilities to train. You will then have one big blob of troops ranging from mail clad nobles to naked fanatics to common spear-weilders. The Barbarians can raise their army very quickly and bring a lot of troops, but thier army will fight as a single unit that can only be divided to a certain extent. The Romans on the other hand can levy their troops in cohorts and legions, with Hastati, Principes and Triarii. They can also reform their millitary to allow the landless poor in. They are also the only faction that can professionalize their army, meaning they have less troops but the troops have a standard of equipment, better training and will of course always be active, meaning it's easier to do things like man forts and protect the borders from small-scale attacks. Every other faction can only have the standard militia.

EB style governments, if anyone knows what that means.

Naval battles, of course

Tech Trees

Governors and generals DO NOT have to be related to you. I think Shogun is the same as this, you have family members AND generals. On this topic, I think Rome should start off as a republic. You are a prominent senator and you have to stay in power. Adds a new dimension to the game; agents handle internal affairs as well as external ones. Diplomats can bribe other senators. Assasains can kill them and so on. If you are not in power you can still of course weild your influence and gain your money, but you are not in complete control. This feature of the game has an OFF button. If you are getting tired of the Senate getting in your way, you can throw them out. There is no "a chance for power" message. Get whatever senators and soldiers you can on your side. Raise the troops you can; if Troops are militia raise who you can from the cities you control, hire mercs and and buy the support of others. If Rome's army is professional it's about the legions you have in your army, plus whatever else you can get. Obviously this is easier if you are already consul, but it is even more important to have support, whether it be in the plebians, the aristocrats (that would be very hard to do) or the army.

Multiplayer campaign: Like typical Rome, but RTS to solve the multiplay issue. I hope you have those watchtowers!!! However, not sure how to get around real time battles with this. Perhaps there is a turn time limit instead of RTS? IDK about this but maybe you could even have an EVE type set up (Bob is the king, I'm one of his generals, Bill is one of my captains.) I know this is probably overambitious but it would be so cool!

1st person!!! I know this is a bit of a stretch for TW, but I'd love to be my general and fight it out! Use you wealth to buy better equipment for yourself! Also be a gladiator in the arena! Multiplay arena too. In custom battles you can also be anything from foot soldier to general.

I know this will be a controversial one, but I'd like to create a faction of my own. Chose starting tech, gov. type (Monarchy, Republic or Democracy) and then based on the tech there is a simple troop editor. Chose equipment and training/skill and the game works out what the values will be. Random map is generated and you pick where you start/random. You then face either real ancient empires, your previously created empires or other peoples which have been downloaded online. Perhaps you can also create your own faction in multiplay?

Realisitc Factons No more "Greek Cities" " "Gaul" "Germania" and "Britannia." Divide them up, doesn't need to have full selection for example just have Athens, Corinth and Sparta for Greece and Adueii and Arvernii instead of Gaul. Can't remember Brtiton major tribes and have no idea about Germania, but I'm sure there are many historians, some of them on this forum, who do.

I am not saying all of these features should be put in the same game, as it would probably take 4 years + to develop. (No actual clue about it though.) However, those are all my thoughts on what CA COULD put in to make a truly revolutionary TW game, which can be the Rome TW of its time (which I think is only fitting for Rome 2.)