*the Future Of Total War*

[Divinus Arma]

The purpose of this thread is address the future of the Total War Series. Recent events have created a flurry of speculation on the intent of Creative Assembly in shaping their future. Well I would like to argue the point that the future of Creative Assembly, and the Total War series, is in large part dependant on the information they gather from their target market: YOU AND I.

So with this in mind, where would you like to see Creative Assembly go from here? Where would you like to see the future of Total War invested?

Don't stop there. Why would your idea work from a playability standpoint? Do you foresee obstacles, and if so, how can they be overcome?

SPEAK UP AND BE HEARD OR LOSE THE FUTURE OF THE TOTAL WAR SERIES!

[Divinus Arma]

I have heard multiple ideas over other threads... Space, the American Revolution, World Wars I and II.

One of the impediments to implementing some of these concepts can be found in the evolution of warfare over the centuries. This article: http://www.d-n-i.net/second_level/fo...on_warfare.htm, and other articles on the topic of "generational warfare" focus on an evolution from 1st gen warfare to modern 4th generation warfare.

One of the key components to the transition between one generation to another is the deliniation of battle lines, deception on the battlefield, and tactical/operational/strategic manuever. Where 1st generation warfare holds clear battle lines, 4th Generation warfare sees the elimination of battle lines.

A good example of 1st Gen Warfare is Phalanx warfare in the 5th century BC and earlier. Opposing wills decided the course of their future by standing toe to toe and duking it out until one side was destroyed or capitulated. The battle lines were obvious, manuever was minimized, and civilians (generally) were left out of the battle.

Modern global terrorism is an example of 4th gen warfare and represents a complete elimination of battle lines, sponsor states, and defined combat. The targets are military, commercial, technology, infrastructure, civilians, anything and everything. The enemy blends within our own society and refuses to fight face to face. We call it cowardice. I call it 4th Gen warfare.

Somewhere in between these two extremes are 2nd and 3rd generation warfare. THE TOTAL WAR SERIES HAS SO FAR BEEN RESTRICTED TO 2ND GENERATION WARFARE. We see manuever at the tactical, operational, and strategic level within the game. When battles are fought, the battle lines are clear. The enemy is apparent. The battlefield is apparent.

World War 2 was 3rd generation warfare. We began to incorporate deception and manuever to extremes that had never been seen before. Instead of simply bashing arms against arms, we went around each other and sought critical vulnerabilites to exploit.

How can TW break out of 2nd Gen warfare and into this Arena? I'm not sure just yet. I'll post again soon.

[Zharakov]

World War: Total War
Some kind of a space title
A Nepolianic game that includes things that happined ells where in the world (like the American Civil War, or is that not important enough? )

Are the ones I'd like to see.



However, I believe that CA is going to keep going further back in time.

I think the next one will be Rome:Total War Hunic Invasion, followed by Assryian: Total War, then Cave Man: Total War. With them leaveing off at Paliazoaic: Total War...

[LegolasII]

world war total war game would be hard to make considering the knowledge that most ppl have of it and it would seem weird for imperialism during this time (well for the axis actually yes but its not liekly that america or britain would start attackin eachotehr and try to kill eachother.....) maybe they could have of Tribal:Total war of the indian tribes....... but i guess it would be hard considering i dont think they had that much variety in weapons. Or even a sorcery:total war with demons, sorcerors, etc.

[Come Together]

My ideal TW would be one that plays like MTW(mostly, take the few good features of RTW), looks like RTW, and bugfree. I could really care less what time period it is if it has these elements.

[MadSpazz]

I would just be thrilled to see MTW 2. The same time period, events, etc., just revamped with some of the new innovations of RTW like graphics, strat map, and I like the new boat/trade system. WWI or WWII would be weird because all the fighting would be ranged, and bombings, artillery barrages, etc. would be fun, but would be hard or confusing to develop and use in game, but that is just my opinion.

[Lochar]

I also would like to see both shogun and medievel revamped graphically. As for future products, well maybe upto gunpower just coming out but after that, I wouldnt enjoy it as much. It would feel like that movie the Last samurai, technology just replacing good old fashion warriors.

I would also just see more innovations to the current timelines already given like supply lines, resources needs (altho not resource gathers like AOE type games) of the sort that iron maybe scarce now where no mopre units can be trained. Better AI, etc , etc

[Hurin_Rules]

I'd like to see a fantasy game.

Why? One of the things that bugs me about RTW is that many of the units are not historically accurate. In a fantasy game these constraints are gone and this wouldn't be a problem. I'd like to use a wedge of trolls to bust open a phalanx or have my mages finish off those pesky horse archers with a couple of fireballs.

[Wishazu]

i dont really mind which time period they use as long as they include a mp campaign.

[AquaLurker]

I would like see a Renaissance period total war in RTW engine, Napoleon total war would seems fine too. Then maybe a Victorian age total war series. If possible a fantasy total war. Alexander total war? Go research on Chinese history and produce a 'Chun Qui Zhan Guo: Total War' or 'Three Kingdoms: Total War?

Mongolian: Total War where they can include Southern Song Chinese faction, the nomadic Lao factions(or later Jin Empire), Xixia Faction, Tibetan factions, Persians faction, Korean faction, Burmese faction, Japanese faction, North Indian factions and include some central Asian or middle eastern factions with eastern European factions in the expansion pack.
Of course the design team will have to put on alot of heavy research on the history of asian armies, culture and history and I can tell you it is really tough to find book relating to (translated into english) asian military history and culture of that period, probably they will have to give it a 'Rome Total War' treatment for gameplay sake. : Book: And If they embark on this, there is definitely be allot of culture appearance inaccuracies but we can't blame them. Even learned European historians writing about Asian histories make cultural reference error.

I think they are more specialized in historical warfare of the 'second generation'(borrowed someone else term ) and should find ways to improve on this aspect of their specialties. Unless they can find a way to produce World War 1 or 2 games that are unique and different (the way that made total war series cool) from the current existing ones in the market, I don't think they should venture into that area.

Starship battles genre are already covered by relic of serria in the form of 'Home World' and 'Xenos'.

[Count Belisarius]

Assuming that TW wants to retain any pretence of realism, I think the current Total War tactical model might not be able to cope with warfare beyond what I call 2nd generation: uniformed combatants, line-of-sight battles, a discrete battlefield, fairly clear battle lines, and sight- or sound- based tactical communications. 2nd generation combat was gone by WWI, and I think the TW tactical model would have trouble with combat as it existed after, say, the Crimean War, the American Civil War and the Franco-Prussian War.

For example, how would the TW tactical engine account for radios, airplanes, snipers, and, most importantly, artillery? In WWI and beyond, heavy artillery (not field guns, but heavy artillery) often did not operate on the 'battlefied' at all. In WWI, for example, an order to attack would come down the chain of command, coupled with a notation that the regiment/division artillery would conduct a rolling bombardment of such-and-such duration, beginning at such-and-such a time. Once troops left their trenches, they were out of touch with high command, since their communications relied primarily on telephones as opposed to radios.

The TW engine would work better, but probably not well, in WWII. In WWII, radio communications largely replaced telephones, and this gave commanders at least theoretical tactical control over artillery that was out of their line of sight. So the TW engine might work. But still, how to incorporate air power (and anti-air units) into the mix? The game probably would wind up clunky and ponderous because of all the additional variables.

Personally, I would LOVE to see a "Napoleon: Total War" perhaps with a "Seven Years' War" or "American Revolution" or "Invasion of Russia" expansion pack. Imagine leading Wellington's British in the Peninsula or taking Frederick the Great's Prussians into battle. The possibilities are practically ENDLESS, especially since "Napoleonic" warfare was technologically unchanged from about 1700 into the 1840's, and we're talking about warfare that occurred all over the world. The basic tactical model is already out there with "Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Battle", albeit with grapics that look like circa 1990.

I also would like to see the incorporation of a tactical engine for naval battles. This may be unfeasible as a practical matter, but it's a great theory. How might the world have been different if the Greeks had not prevailed at Salamis, if Marcus Antonius had won at Actium, or if Nelson had been annihilated at the Nile or at Trafalgar?

I think a fantasy version of the TW engine would be fun, too. This might add a younger crowd to the existing fan base, which would increase sales, which is always good for the developers.

A revamping of MTW or STW, either one, would be an excellent in the extreme. I cannot tell you how many hours I have devoted to this series of games, and the greatness of STW and MTW is the primary reason why I am still playing RTW with all of its deficiencies.

Other ideas. "Conquistadors: Total War". "China: Total War" or "India: Total War" or "Renaissance: Total War" some of which other posters already suggested.

[hrvojej]

As always, the first thing that comes to mind is the blend between Europa Universalis strategical game (not necessarily in the same period as EU though) and TW battles.

Alas, 'tis but a dream.

[The Stranger]

They definitly should remake MTW, it's good for us and for them cause most people will buy it.

[[GG]vonDöbeln]

Napoleonic Total War would be awesome, as would Lord of The Rings Total War.

[GG]vD

[Dutch_guy]

Napoleonic Total War would be awesome, as would Lord of The Rings Total War.

if you want Lord of The Rings Total War. you should try Lord of the Rings Battle for Middle-Earth , it's the closest you can get at teh moment
was going to buy that game if I wasn't broke..

[caesar44]

As always, the first thing that comes to mind is the blend between Europa Universalis strategical game (not necessarily in the same period as EU though) and TW battles.

Alas, 'tis but a dream.

yes yes , perfect , history and gameplay

[AquaLurker]

Napoleonic Total War would be awesome, as would Lord of The Rings Total War.

if you want Lord of The Rings Total War. you should try Lord of the Rings Battle for Middle-Earth , it's the closest you can get at teh moment
was going to buy that game if I wasn't broke..

I have the game...and I really hate the multiplayer games, the 'good' heros are too powerful and Mordor is trash. But other than that the campaign are nice.

[Vanya]

GAH!

Biblical Total War

Scenario #1:
Youz be Moses. Youz lead your sirley band of believers through the desert so that youz can carve out your empire in the lands of your enemies. Can youz come down from Mount Sinai and seize the throne of Egypt and make yourself pharoah? Can you conquer the Assyrians? Or will youz be crucified into a mere footnote in history? GAH!

Scenario #2:
Crusades! Kinda half-done in MTW. So a full-blown "behead the infidel and drink their blood" type game would be nice.

Scenario #3:
While we be on the subject of glorious salvation, the current Holey Land conundrum can be included too! Youz can march out as a PLO "general" and lead a brigade of Elite Armored Stone Throwing Youths and try to take over the Jewish state through terror and blood. If you tech up some, youz can then field Militia Qasam Rocket Units and even hire Mercenary Jihadi Footsoldiers or the more elitist "special" units of the Army of [Insert name of deity here].

Scenario #4:
Dante Total War. Field legions of the dead in your bid to conquer Hell from Dante's Satan. Seal the deal by annexing the ninth circle of Hell. Start off by recruiting the guy that rolls the rock up the hill, fight 3-headed pooches, etc. Vanya sez: this be a FIREY game indeed! Let the brimstone burn! GAH!



GAH!

[Mikeus Caesar]

In my mind, the next TW would be one starting in the Renaissance when hand to hand combat has been almost completely removed, up to sometime just before WW1, when mechanized warfare is starting to replace everything.

[Divinus Arma]

Some good ideas here. I think becasue of the advances in warfare following the sceond generation, anything beyond WWI would be incompatible with the current system. Air power, more then anything creates a real difficulty.

However, I think air power could be included on a very limited scope, a cross between "Civilization" and RTW. Whereas RTW uses navy, but omits naval battles, the same concept could apply to early airpower.

Airpower in WWI was a footnote, and was not crucial to either side gaining the absolute advantage. Airpower become the dominate leverage in WW II, when Germany passed over the Maginot line set up by the French. The french had largely dismissed airpower, and that is why they were smoked so quickly.

Getting back on topic, WW I was still quite strightforward as far as battles were concerned. Lines were drawn, trenches were dug, and the enemy faced off. The imposition of the Machine gun made a big difference, as did the tank and long range artillery. Still, I think all of these can be incoprorated into a TW style of play without reverting to garbage tactics like Age of empires and command and conquer. There will certainly be some challenges with this.

Prior to this, the age of Napoleon and the American revolutionary war would be a great concept and more easily incoporated. Battle lines still formed "plates and seams" and a break in the battle line was still disastrous. Even better, the ranged combat is limited to short distances, and enemies could eventually engage in hand to hand. Additionally, imperial exapnsion was a big part of each country during these centuries: America to the west with manifest destiny, the french in europe, english imperialism and colonization, even the asian countries were active.

Therefore, I think the next TW game that could be created while maintaining the integrity of the current system should be Gunpowder: Totalwar. It should incorpoate the end of the renaissance, the napolianic wars, the american revolution all the way up to the war of 1812. Union and Confederacy: Total War should be an expansion pack.

This could be done, it could be huge, and it doesn't break the gameplay basic concepts.

[Arrowhead]

Age of empires: Total war!

[Jagger]

Personally I wonder if Total War is going to abandon any pretenses of realism and go the arcade route. STW and MTW did focus on realism as much as possible. We didn't have fantasy units or 3 second melees. If they continue further along this design path, the game will be for someone other than me.

I will be much more cautious about my next TW purchase.

[A.Saturnus]

Pacifism: Total War

[Quietus]

The Sims: Total War

"Men! Let's take back our neighborhood from these nasty barbarian gangsters!".

"So, lift up your baseball bats and frying pans, adjust your sneakers then let's give them hell!"

[BeeSting]

As always, the first thing that comes to mind is the blend between Europa Universalis strategical game (not necessarily in the same period as EU though) and TW battles.

Alas, 'tis but a dream.

And the surprising success of the game in spite its great depth and detail to historical accuracy. It just goes about to prove that the market is there, it's just that the ones targeting this market have been poor in making good games.

I agree…. such combination would truly be my dream come true.

[mxlm]

Getting back on topic, WW I was still quite strightforward as far as battles were concerned. Lines were drawn, trenches were dug, and the enemy faced off. The imposition of the Machine gun made a big difference, as did the tank and long range artillery. Still, I think all of these can be incoprorated into a TW style of play without reverting to garbage tactics like Age of empires and command and conquer. There will certainly be some challenges with this.

WWI didn't need to be as straightforward as it was, though; that, in essence, occured dye to a lack of imagination from the leadership of all sides. Hundreds of miles of trenches bar your way? Fine. Go around. Use an amphibious landing. Whatever. Oh, right, that'd be risky. So instead we'll use frontal assaults. And more frontal assaults. And more frontal assaults. And...

*ahem* [/tangent]

[mrdarklight]

I don't think you can do anything after the American Civil War or before say the Greeks. Total War is largely based on unit formations - well-ordered lines facing each other standing up. This went away after the US Civil War and didn't exist much before the Greeks.

If they really changed the format of the game, they could go for the post-Civil War stuff, which could be interesting, but it would be a big departure and maybe not suitable for the "total war" series. Space battles are totally out of the question I think.
Something like the battle of Kursk or Kharkov in WWII might be doable. WW1 was really trench warfare, which could be interesting too, but again, it would really diverge from what Total War has been so far.
I don't think the Revolutionary War was quite long enough for warrant a whole Total War game.

So some ideas (with cool titles!) are:

Blue vs. Gray: Total War
Napoleon: Total War
Greece: Total War (really would work well as an expansion to RTW, actually)
And I really liked this other guy's idea:
Middle Earth: Total War!

[mrdarklight]

Oh, wait, how about naval warfare? That could work...
Frigates: Total War

Maybe a new franchise with this:
Britain: Sea War...

[soibean]

I have the game...and I really hate the multiplayer games, the 'good' heros are too powerful and Mordor is trash. But other than that the campaign are nice.

I thought the game was awful
the gameplay was boring, the maps were... I dont know... had a lack of inspiration. the heros were trash as you said, units had their super advantage units which could total anything. i.e. trolls wrecked house against everything unless they massed archers, in which case I couldnt win. I hated how your cavalry died from charging into your opponent, no matter the angle and what they were doing. Nothing like losing half your cavalry force from charging into the flank of already engaged orcs.
there were many other things i hated about this game... if you disagree Im sorry enjoy it while you can

[soda]

I'm not sure what Medieval TW covered since I never played it but I get the impression it dealt with Europe and a bit of western Asia. I'd like to see a game that heads a bit east (and perhaps a bit earlier) so we can have the Arabs, Persians, multiple Turkish groups, Indians, Byzantium etc. Again I'm not sure what MTW covered from this reigon.


I really don't like hte idea of going further back in time. Sure theres potential with Persia and Egypt and Greece and Assyria all fighting each other but I don't want to have lesser technology and all.