And after this?

[Dellathane]

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)

[InsaneApache]

Millwall v Glasgow Rangers Total war 1980s stylie.

[Lemur]

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.

[quadalpha]

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.

[easytarget]

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.

[quadalpha]

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.

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!

[Vuk]

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 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.

[Moros]

I'd personally would 'dig' an Assyria total war or something. I'd play it.

[Prussian to the Iron]

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.

[Kralizec]

I'd personally would 'dig' an Assyria total war or something. I'd play it.

Agreed, a near-east bronze age setting would be pretty neat.

[johnhughthom]

Millwall v Glasgow Rangers Total war 1980s stylie.

With Italian 'Ultras' and Turkish dlc.

[Desertdude]

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.

[EB rocks]

my thoughts are on dumdumdundundundumdumdundudun Hittite total war

[Martok]

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!

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.

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.

[Prussian to the Iron]

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.

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.

[jaspritsingh]

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.

[kambiz]

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.

[Kocmoc]

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.

Yup. I want to remind people on one of the first real Multiplayer games ever, Gettysburg. That was played from many "STW-Oldtimer".
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...

[AntiCommie]

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.

[Lemur]

Looks like we find out tomorrow.

[The Outsider]

Looks like we find out tomorrow.

I sincerly hope that its the total warhammer. Fingers crossed.

[Monk]

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)

In the grimdark of the far future, there is only... total war.

Total Warhammer 40,000.

[dge1]

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.

[seleucid empire]

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?

[The Stranger]

imo they now have the technology to make a World Total War spanning first part of 20th century.

[Noncommunist]

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?

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.

[Greyblades]

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.

[Oene]

Next game will be Medieval 3, IMO. or a game about 16-17th century.

[Beskar]

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.

That is called Medieval 2 and it already exists! (since it has early gunpowder units in M2)
I mostly played it with the Lands to Conquer mod by Just Lusted, but I think those were still pretty default.

[LoboCaelus]

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?