An other "Next TotalWar Game" thread

[sunsmountain]

1492 to 1815 , Europe , North Africa and the Middle East , all factions and a much better diplomacy system with maximum possibilities

Please, go play Europa Universalis 2, all of you gun lovers! What's the tacts in that?? Ever played Sid Meier's Gettysburg? Boring! Gun battles suck.

Or Empires in Arms if you like Napoleon, a cool boardgame.

[aleh]

Here are my ideas, and feel free to disagree:

1. A WW game starting at about 1936/7/8/9 and continues up until 2000, and it would be 2 months per turn...That way, good battles, and the strategy after that would be good....Meh, it's prbly not gonna happen, and if they do, the potential for it fubaring are very high.

2. From about 1500 to 1850, in Europe/Part of the America/Part of Asia.

3. Asian:TOtal War from about 1200 to 1600. From Japan(possibly Australia) to like Central Asia.


What do you think?

[caesar44]

Please, go play Europa Universalis 2, all of you gun lovers! What's the tacts in that?? Ever played Sid Meier's Gettysburg? Boring! Gun battles suck.

Or Empires in Arms if you like Napoleon, a cool boardgame.

"go" , "Boring!" , "suck" , well ? and they say that the Dutch are cold people...

[scorillo]

1400 - 1700 period when whole Europe was terrifyed by the Otoman Empire...wich wanted to conquer all

A little more diplomacy stuff and I say, this will make a great TW

[LittleRaven]

Personally, I'd love another Shogun. There's just something about Samurai that touches the soul. ;)

But I see one major problem with redoing Shogun. CA has put a TON of work into the siege portion of the game, and while more can be done, the strides have been enormous. Ladders and siege towers and catapults, oh my! Units fighting on top of walls with men tumbling to their deaths in the streets below. That's just good stuff. Seeing all they've done, the castle battles of Shogun are positively embarrassing by comparison.

Now, I know very little about Japanese history. What were sieges like in feudal Japan? I don't think they had much in the way of siege engines, or at least I've never read about any.

Would we still get to enjoy cool siege battles in a new Shogun game?

[Hold Steady]

I think ww(2) can be done with this engine. Only thing one should focus on is not as so much the advantage of height or something similair which follows from applying Honerouble Tzu's rules, but more to line-of-sight things. Frankly, I've been waiting for a good WW2 game since Close Combat 2!
CC 3, 4 and 5 bogged down in strange fenomena like leadership, losing the effect tactical battles had on strategic level and too much tank-focussing. Combat mission doesn't look good enough and GI soldiers and Allied assault west front were plain floppers. Nice idea, but you can't copy 2-dimension Close combat to 3d, not like that..

But enough of this, Total war Rome engine could do this. Line of sight gets important. Ambush area even more, cover from greens, buildings! Units can enter buildings, guns can destroy buildings. Rifle fire only gets truly effective at a certain distance. Imagine a Tank rolling across grass, infantry crouched behind cover with antitank weapons, you should use infantry to flush them out.. Order a squad to assault a Machine gun emplacement, they start throwing grenades at thirty metres.. Artillery cover, mortars, fatigue, hand to hand combat, morale.. It can be done. But more important, a way to finally combine the strategic factors (a bit like hearts of Iron, allthough I hate their way of handling it and the degree of detail is too high for this kind of game) with tactics like close combat. I saw this game 5 years ago in my mind. armies like in RTW moving independently though the strategic map unless challenged. Imagine their progress influenced by fuel shortages, fortified positions, amphibious invasions. The air war can be handled purely in statistics if one wishes. Invest in bombers and fighters and research and it pays out in effect on economics, attrition. Of course recources play an important part. Why else attack the kaukasus or the middle east? And cut of the allies at the suez and give ém a big penalty.

Well, irrespective of what it will be.. if it will be.. I'm consoling myself with the idea that the next TW, if any, IS ALLREADY IN DEVELOPMENT. How soon they were working on RTW after MTW VI? Yep, even before they made the add on I believe. Why different now?

[Claudius the God]

Mesoamerica: Total War. with the rise of the Aztec and Maya empires, and the numerous factions in that region of the world, divided into Early Middle and Late periods (like MTW), with the Conquistadors appearing in the Late period.

[Hold Steady]

Mesoamerica: Total War. with the rise of the Aztec and Maya empires, and the numerous factions in that region of the world, divided into Early Middle and Late periods (like MTW), with the Conquistadors appearing in the Late period.

Hmm, jungle fighting? not my cup of tea.. Watch em go bananas

[kingwill]

definately an arab expansion total war, or crusaders. of if they aere being really ambitious a medievil stlye remake but using a whole world map like on superpower2 - that could end up with some wierd outcomes though like the maoris invading central america but it would alos cover loads of the ideas stated already.

[Craterus]

I think that WWI and WWII would be fantastic ideas for the next Total War Games.

WWI has more countries that played major roles in the conflict. But WWII would have several countries that didn't have much of an effect in the war. These would be a real challange to play as.

However it would be difficult to get all areas of the world into it. It would probably just have to be the European theatre. In Civilization 2 there was a mini campaign for WWII. That had America starting out with several cities in the east coast. That was the edge of the map. Something like this could be implimented into a WWI or WWII total war game.

Gameplay on the battle map would be difficult to perfect though...

Not a lot of difference between units in WW1. They were all basically the same, just speaking different laguages and wearing different uniforms.

[Kitty208]

I wouldn't really like to see a Shogun or Medevial 2. It'd feel like playing enhanced versions of the originals. I want to see a completely new time period. Since I've always loved Greek history(particularly the Spartans), I'd like to see a Hellenistic Total War. It could have a map with Greece and Sicily on the westernmost part then go east all the way out to India. I think the best timeframe would be during the time of Alexander the Great b/c of the more diverse units. Not sure how many factions you could get out of that though. A pelopponesian or persian war campaign would also be nice, but there is almost no unit diversity amongst the Greeks. Aside from that, I'd would also be pleased w/ a Napoleonic Total War or a China Total War.

[Kurando]

I wouldn't be surprised if a bigger redo of shogun or medieval cropped up...

That's my thinking too + I would certainly love to see Shogun Totalwar 2, the first one ruled in it's day, but they could do so much more with these new graphics engines et al.

For new stuff my predilection would be to the US Civil War era, but I'm probably in the minority there. Sid Meyer did it well, but Gettysburg Total War would rock like Nel Carter on a swing set!

[Hold Steady]

That's my thinking too + I would certainly love to see Shogun Totalwar 2, the first one ruled in it's day, but they could do so much more with these new graphics engines et al.

For new stuff my predilection would be to the US Civil War era, but I'm probably in the minority there. Sid Meyer did it well, but Gettysburg Total War would rock like Nel Carter on a swing set!

Not a bad one, but on the other hand, not much troop variation. I'd still like WWII the most, but the engine should be severly modified for that.

[Sjakihata]

I'd like a China: Total War

I dont think they should do a shoggy 2. I like the memories of a very great game - I dont want it spoiled by crappy rome engine and cartoonish strat map. Thank you.

[womble]

"...Combat mission doesn't look good enough ..."

[boggle]

You want a good WW2 tactical game and you dismiss CM as lacking eye candy? Probably the most realistic tactical game that's actually good to play? With an AI (actually 3 levels of AI operating interactively) that knocks most game AIs into a cocked hat? You do know that there are three versions of CM, of steadily-increasing graphical sophistication, and that there is a large and very talented community of skin-modders which can prettify your game (units and terrain) no end should that be your desire?

Try it. It's not expensive and has at least as much replay value as the battle side of any TW game, though its realism means it is by no means easy to learn: you can lose the tutorial battles, easy.

Meh. "Doesn't look good enough..."

[Kurando]

Not a bad one, but on the other hand, not much troop variation. I'd still like WWII the most, but the engine should be severly modified for that.

I will certainly take whatever comes with a smile. To be honest I am amazed the the original S:TW ever got made at all + the other games and expansions that followed have all been solid. I'd have to say at this point I am confident that whatever direction CA takes the series, it will be another winner.

[hundurinn]

IMHO WW1 and WW2 would be foolish. Take for example MTW and RTW, both happened in a era that spanned hundred of years. WW1 took place between 1914-1948 and WW2 1939-1945. WW2 and WW1 have been used in too many games. Using the TW engine they have now would be impossible. The map would be HUGE even too big to play. Anything after Napoleon would be insane.

[Mongoose]

Please, go play Europa Universalis 2, all of you gun lovers! What's the tacts in that?? Ever played Sid Meier's Gettysburg? Boring! Gun battles suck.

Or Empires in Arms if you like Napoleon, a cool boardgame.

Any one who thinks that battles with guns are with out tactics should read up on frederick the great.....

[Doug-Thompson]

I want Medieval Total War II: A new strategic map and diplomatic options ala RTW and the tactical game of MTW, with improved graphics only.

[LittleRaven]

I want Medieval Total War II: A new strategic map and diplomatic options ala RTW and the tactical game of MTW, with improved graphics only.

I could live with that, but I want more than just improved graphics. I want REAL castle sieges. I want men with ladders and mortars and cannons and catapult towers and all that other fun stuff.

And I quite enjoy the ability to 'view' my settlements and watch them grow. So I want that too.

I also want the traits system from Rome for my royal family, except I want it fixed, please. (I was amazed at the difference the fix pack made in that regard) And possibly expanded to include princesses in a more meaningful fashion.

But most importantly, regardless of when it's set, it's time for a major investment of time into the AI. With Rome, CA really took the engine to the next level. Now they need to bring the AI to the next level as well, so that it has some hope of competing with a human in the new environment.

[MrWhipple]

I want STONE AGE: Total War (and all in caps like that too).
I want to see big hairy guys chucking rocks and spears at each other.
I want to see brontos and trexes running amok
I want to see brush fences burning in the moonlight
I want to see cave women weeping over dead children
But most of all I want to see all of the whiners on this forum quit crying because
it isn't historical.

[HarunTaiwan]

Better AI: TW



any region, any time period, just better AI, slower battles, and more tactics.

[Divinus Arma]

We can only hope that Colonies and Empires: Total War will be next. Is this evidence?:

From the Com:

Q: Will you in future TW games (if you continue the Franchise) be able to BUILD settlements? This would make the gameplay deeper so if there is a river nearby you could build it there and not need to build a dock. (It might require stronger fortifications from pirates and enemy factions though...)

A: Firstly, the Total War franchise will continue after Barbarian Invasion. Our designers are currently engaged in heated debates (or verbal punch-ups, it depends on your point of view) about the nature of the next Total War game. Now as to whether settlements will be built in the game (we presume you mean anywhere on the map): this would depend on the subject matter of the game. If such a mechanism were appropriate, then we would consider using it.

Hmmm. Please?

OHHHHHH the possibilities! Pirates, colonies, imperial line armies and cannon! The era is filled with historical evidence and very well documented. Imagine seiging the Fortresses of Neuf-Brisach or Spilberk! The fortresses of the time are so condusive to this idea.

CA, if you do this, PLEASE do it right. Rome was great. THIS could be legendary! The art, the music, the architecture, the changes in government, the changes in religion! What a time if strife, of growth, of ideas!

I would preorder this like a year in advance and forsake my social life for the following year.

There is also a TON of possibility for spinoffs on PC and console. The revolutions, the imperial declines, individual stories of heroes in the time...

Just do it right... like we know you will. No "Imperial Glory". Take your sweet time.

[King of Atlantis]

I think it should be Fantasy!
I think it should be no-franchise fantasy!

and destroy the best gaming community I have ever seen...

Replace all the historians, and historian wannabes, with loads of eight year olds, who probably never have heard of Gual before.


Ah, what a sad day it will be...

[antisocialmunky]

I just want the Shogun Movies back...

Perhaps CA should just go nuts and run with a '5000 BCE - 2000AD History:Total War.' Just do EVERYTHING. That's blow Civilization, Empire Earth, and all those games out of the water... That is, if they made the strat map more strategic.

[Kor Khan]

This is my list of good possibilitites (in no particular order):

Remake of M:TW

Remake of S:TW

Chinese history (any era up until ca. 1650 would be great)

Europe, 16th-17th century (Renaissance, 30 Years War)

Europe, 17th-18th century ("Cossacks" era)

early 18th century- ca. 1820 ("Enlightenment and Imperialism", could cover the whole world).



I know WWI and WWII sound fun, but I agree with all those who seriously doubt that it would work well. For a start, WWI would consist of sitting in trenches and having sautéed rat for dinner every day. Any big attack on the enemy lasts about five seconds before everyone is massacred. Therefore, the system of a strategy map with important one-day battles fought on the battlemap wouldn't work well.

WWII: I guess that it's a good setting, but

a. Once again it wouldn't work well with the Total War engine. Warfare was just completely different, with battles lasting a long time and on a much bigger scale.


b. There are just so many WWII games out there right now, I think everyone's basically sick of them.

[Ciaran]

I would really like to see a fantasy total war. Something like Master of Magic using the total war engine would be great.

I happen to agree. Master of Magic was - and still is - one of my favourite games and I´d love doing the battles there in the Rome engine. As well, it´s not a licensed universe, so there´d be (hopefully) neither any self-arrogated "Guardians of the Truth" (whom I utterly despise and hate, and that´s official) nor any threads degenerating to "They didn´t use that nail on shoes at that time" (which is just as bad).

[Catiline]

Look at the title of the thread guys and decide for yourselves if this is the forum...

Thread Closed