Creative Assembly Now Has No Excuse For Holding Off On America:Total War Pages PREV 1 2 | |
Admittedly, if they set it a few years earlier, say 1840's, they could cover a lot more territory and a lot more nations. For example there is the Mexican American war, that time Texas was independent and more. If the game goes south into Central America you could include Yucatan, which was an independent nation for a while, and the Cruzob Maya. Speaking of Maya you could include some Indian nations like the Sioux, or Nez Perces. That said, that might not be enough seeing as how the USA is expected to steam-roll them all, except Canada. | |
Oddly enough, the lack of that function bugged me at first in N:TW (the 'troop recovery mechanic'). However, E:TW's one was annoying as hell because if your 'retraining' army got caught up in a fight you'd have to retrain them again (or is that what you're referring to). In R/M2, it was pretty intuitive IMO since you just got them to a settlement where it was possible to retrain and... well, retrained/reequiped them (I'm OC about having the same weapon/armour upgrade across my armed forces which can get annoying at times). M:TW (the really old one) was just weird when it came to this because you couldn't retrain and no matter what you did, some units just could not be disbanded because its commanding officer was an idiotically beefed up official that was impossible to demote.
That's fair enough. I was vice-versa until I got into E:TW, though Empire's army retraining mechanic annoyed the living daylights out of me (see above). As for the building aspect... well... I'd just call it different, because the 1st gen games (S & M... ¬_¬) were all about a strict(-ish) building sequence which was probably the most accurate, but definitely the least fun. The 2nd gen games (R & M2) were about population and I think the public order factor in these two titles put you off a bit as well? (Well, it did me, as it becomes a pain in the ass in late-game.) And in the 3rd gen games (E, N & S2) it revolved around the technology researched (something I kept forgetting about in S2).
Ooooo... I like that... now why didn't I think of that... ... Actually, that'd be awesome! With agricultural and industrial research options (or just that 'Abolition of Slavery' one from both E & N:TW) you can easily weave the ACW into the narrative. Crimean, the July Revolution (or lack thereof) etc. etc. and have the Wars of German Unification (with greater historical fidelity) as an expansion pack mebbe. Gawd, I'd so get that...
I'd get that too... >_> ... <_< though only if they don't all speak Mandarin! =P And since everyone is spouting desired titles of their own: Hellenes: Total War.
That title in itself is ironic... | |
If I can have LUBU! as a general its an instant pre-order for me. Edit:oops realized this is a lttle bit of a necro. Thats what I get for searching total war then quoting without looking at date -___- | |
Personally, no way. I have absolutely 0 interest in that time period. I wish Creative Assembly to actually spin right around and go back to a time period even earlier than Rome. Do a complete reversal. Fuck yeah! | |
I just want Lord of the Rings: Total War. | |
Base TW games are always set more over a historical period though, with 'Add-Ons' like N:TW and S2:FotS focusing on a specific conflict. So maybe if they release a 'Pax Britannica: Total War' (even though that makes no sense) it could come along as an add-on. If they don't go whirling back to Rome though I can see them going Edwardian/WW1. Aircraft and artillery working as NGFS did in FotS. Machine guns like the sakers in ETW which you emplaced at the outset and couldn't move. captcha: stand by me | |
Third Age mod for Medieval II I'd love to see a Rome II, anything 20th century and beyond just wouldn't work. | |
I don't care where they set it, as long as it has good AI and is moddable. That would rocket the game from "well, I could buy this but I could also install a new RTW mod" to "DAY 1 BUY GOTY ALL YEARS!!11!!' for me. | |
Yeah.... I'd play it for sure, I've played all the TW game plus XPs, with the exception of FoTS. I reckon Rome 2 will be the next one though | |
Definitely a Rome reboot. It's still the best in the series. Three Kingdoms China makes sense, the warfare that took place in that era was so different there are a shitload of ways to prolong campaigns and make them interesting. Or they could actually take on fantasy for once instead of the usual mod, they could cash-in on Game of Thrones without screwing it up like Atlus did. | |
What makes you think that? Don't get me wrong, I want to believe, but if they dropped any hints I didn't catch them... | |
I really don't care about the States, but I'd play a Nouvelle-France: Total War. There could be some US stuff in there too, but it would have to be mostly about the early days of Canada. | |
If they want to get ambitious it would be cool if they did one for Europe and North America during the mid-19th century, there were quite a few wars to go around for that to work out. | |
Come to think about it, I'd be curious as to how a pre/early-Arab middle-east game would work out. 'Cos you've got plenty of potential factions in the area and no end of reason why they'd want to clobber each other.
Nouvelle France?! In what setting? Regardless, it'd have to be post-Napoleon, and if so, up to WWI they were only a major belligerent in one war and you're kind of limiting the theatre there. And regarding the birth of Canada, the lack of factions with a vested interest don't make it particularly engaging as far as replay-value is concerned. France, Britain, the States and maybe the locals... unless I'm missing something here. (No disrespect, my NA history sucks prior to 1800.)
Ah, the only problem with that is that the wars in Europe didn't concern the Americans, and the war in America, the Europeans made a point not to interfere with (no cause, no profit). I'll direct everyone to my Das Reich post of earlier... in this thread, no less... | |
It has to be either Rome 2, Victoria TW or some kind of ancient China TW. I'd love any of those, to be honest. American civil war? Too limited. DLC at the most. | |
The whole point of Total War is to take a faction and do what you want with it. The Scots didn't utterly crush the English and French to make a superpower in Western Europe in real life, but in my game they did. Why not allow the US to fight Spain 50 years early, or maybe let Prussia ally itself with the Union? | |
True, but from a gamer's perspective, it still doesn't really make much sense. If you start off in the states (as either main faction), you've got the enemy in front of you to deal with. Unless you make a quick peace, there is never going to be any real gameplay purpose (or practical access) to sending an expedition to Europe. Sure you can have your alliances, but all your 'real' efforts are going to be localised. And the same applies to Europe. Once you build up the resources to be able to send an army across the pond you must've conquered a fair plot, and if that's the case you're going to be knee deep in war if the enemy faction(s) have more than a handful of provinces. To make the military move across the ocean you need to outlay both naval and army forces. Better off finishing off one theatre, then moving on to the other. If that's the case, then you may as well have them as separate games, or have the ACW as an expansion pack. This was why Empire was such a good idea, as the United Provinces, Britain, Spain & France all had vested interests either side of the Atlantic, which is effectively lost to all but the British in mid-1800's. As I said before, the only genuinely viable setting for this time period is continental Europe... again... | |
I'd love a Viking: Total War, it would be a lot of fun laying waste to small villages. | |
I want a "BC: Total War" or "Rome 2: Total War". The former because of the extra breadth it could bring - from ancient Sumer, Assyria, and Old Kingdom Egypt through the fall of Rome - the latter because it's more likely to actually occur. | |
Have Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion? Look up the mod Viking Invasion 2. Really cool take on the Viking Invasion expansion pack for the original Medieval Total War. | |
I don't have Barbarian Invasion, unfortunately. :-( I might have to head for Steam after my exams have finished. | |
Rome Total War Gold is ten bucks on steam. And I'll leave you a link to the Viking Invasion Mod. | |
My history sucks too, eh eh, and I probably don't know what Total War veterans expect from the games. but... What I would like is a game set around the St.-Lawrence River and the Great Lakes, between 1750 and 1850, when the English took over Kebec which eventually led to Canada being mostly an English-speaking country. US support and allies among the different native tribes could provide some unexpected turnarounds depending on alliances. Now, if you want an expansion that seems a fully French Canada take on France's Navy, I wouldn't have a problem against that either. | |
I really we could take the best of Paradox's games and Creative Assembly's games and mash them together. I used to play so much Total War (Rome, Medieval 2, Empire in particular), but can't really get myself to after swapping over to Paradox's Europa Universalis 3 and Crusader Kings 2. That said, there are still several areas in which the Total War series is better. Besides the tactical realtime battles, there are also some diplomacy elements that are totally lacking from Paradox's titles, such as buying and selling provinces. But if they were to make another Total War, why not a post-Roman 600AD one? That would be kind of fun if it had more detail than the Rome Barbarians expansion. | |
What we REALLY need is Stormrise 2! Come on, Creative Assembly, make it happen! ... What? Seriously though, give us Rome 2 or Medieval 3. Either one is good. | |
I think that Big Huge Games were better when they were making Total Annihilation so I think they should make another game like that. | |
Barking up the wrong tree there, mate... BHG made the Rise of Nations series, not Total War (Creative Assembly).
*meh* s'ok. To be fair, the whole idea of the settlement of the New World (i.e. a few generations after their arrival) right through to the war of 1812 has pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenty of potential, and a massive chunk of that would be set in Canada. Say you're the British governor: no potential to train troops except local militias, but complete missions for Parliament = reinforcements from home. You can apply that to the French as well. This way, you can have a presence with the European players, or just go with the 13Colonies or one of the native American tribes, it'd be possible and no more narrow in gameplay variety than Napoleon (characterised by unit rosters that hardly varied from faction to faction). | |
I'd like a Total War game that doesn't have guns. Rome II please. | |
Do i get a cookie for successful thread necro? JK i already apologized. OT. I would love the rise of total war (Total war+Rise of Nations) I've heard some people dream about. Total war starting rome or pre rome all the way through medieval to modern times would be epic. Would take alot of development time and money thought...Ah a man can dream cant he. | |
Clumsy people. | |
| Pages PREV 1 2 | |
I agree, we need a medieval III or Rome II. They were the better ones.