Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

A Total War Saga – Announce Blog

1234579

Comments

  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKPosts: 36,085Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    edited July 2017

    Ok...you are right....but "moves the time period forward in much the same way" keeps in consideration Age of Charlemagne?

    Imperator Augustus ≈ 40 B.C.
    Attila ≈ 450
    Charlemagne ≈ 800
    Cromwell ≈ 1650

    So from Augustus to Charlemagne there are ≈ 840 years
    From Charlemagne to Cromwell there are ≈ 850 years
    :smile:

    "spiritual follow-up" could mean that there is no major innovation in the game if compared to Rome 2.

    I consider that's hopeful thinking, if the game is based on Rome II it is not going to take the time forward from the latest part of Attila but from the Rome II period c 20-30 BC. I suspect it's more likely to go forward from Augustus but not reach Attila.

    In terms of spiritual successor to Augustus I would think the crisis of the third century a more likely candidate - a period of civil war eventually ended by a new ruler re-uniting the empire.

    It would be interesting if you were right, though, but we'll have to wait and see.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • mishu_warriormishu_warrior Posts: 6Registered Users
    But the HISTORICAL NEW CONTENT TEAM is already doing that:

    -> Campaign Pack DLC (see the concept art...)

    I suppose that the HISTORICAL FLASHPOINT TEAM works on a substantially different age....otherwise why would they need 2 separate teams?

    However in "What The Teams Are Working On 07-06-17" they say:
    "We are planning to set this in an era we have already visited, but will cover a particular period we are very fond of and haven’t done enough justice to yet".

    As I haven't played empire or medieval, I can't say If my previous theory is still reasonable...

    Veterans of Total War, it's up to you....

  • BillyRuffianBillyRuffian Moderator UKPosts: 36,085Registered Users, Moderators, Knights
    edited July 2017
    There has never been a TW game set in the 17th century, apart from a tiny bit of Shogun and Shogun 2 (Sengoku Jidai ended 1603). That's why the period is one of the favourite guesses for the new main historical game.

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)

    |Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi

    Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest

    "We wunt be druv". iot6pc7dn8qs.png
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,386Registered Users

    There has never been a TW game set in the 17th century, apart from a tiny bit of Shogun and Shogun 2 (Sengoku Jidai ended 1603). That's why the period is one of the favourite guesses for the new main historical game.

    more realistic IMO (and a better idea) than the 'saga' title being set there.

    English Civil War is (contrary to what they stated for the 'sagas' intensely character-driven, since it started almost entirely because of the 'personality' of Charles I, and was lost ;) almost entirely because of the 'personality' of Oliver Cromwell. But it's a part of a larger period of conflict that includes the 30 years war, which it would be silly to exclude; and if you're in the 17th c you might as well broaden the scope to include events in E. Europe - the last victories of the Polish husaria, the Cossack rebellions, emergence of Muscovy as a power, etc.All told, it's a better main title setting.

    Since people are speculating, I think it's worth pointing out that *if* that's the coast of Ireland, (a) it could simply be recycled from another game at this point; (b) even if it is from in-game, all it means is that Ireland is in the game. So it could focus on the British Isles; it could focus on W Europe, it could even focus on Europe more broadly. So we don't really know much.

    *If* it does focus on the British Isles, the Roman/Dark Ages time frame of R2/Attila would suggest the following possibilities:

    1. Roman conquest of Britain
    2. Saxon conquest of England
    3. Unification of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms
    4. Viking invasions
    5. Norman Conquest

    My own 2 cents/wishful thinking is that 1. would be too similar (aside from geography/faction design) to CiG; 3 not too dissimilar from Mercia campaign in AoC and not much faction diversity, 4 & 5 also with only moderate faction diversity and rather far afield from a 'Roman' theme. #2 though could explore north/west/Irish celtic differences, plus several Saxon (etc.) factions and a Roman 'legacy' faction, each with different strengths and possibly mechanics. A time-frame in the 500s would also cover a period accessible in Attila, but not yet given its own focus.
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users
    I think it's Viking Invasion. It fits in with the description of revisiting something they have already done, but haven't done enough justice to yet.
  • LESAMALESAMA Member Posts: 1,148Registered Users
    ESKEHL said:

    I think it's Viking Invasion. It fits in with the description of revisiting something they have already done, but haven't done enough justice to yet.

    I agree all though they did it justice with the dlc after medieval 1. Believe it was total war Viking invasion.

    Still an area which could appeal to a broad adience.

    I personally would like an upgraded Rome 2 with better diplomatic options, battles, sieges, trade etc. Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen :(

  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users
    LESAMA said:



    I personally would like an upgraded Rome 2 with better diplomatic options, battles, sieges, trade etc. Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen :(

    I agree! Recently started up Rome II with Haegemonia mod and now the grand campaign is actually playable. I got to say that adding a population mechanic, improving internal politics and adding some of the features from Attila such as governors. Do all this in a patch and the game would be awesome
  • mishu_warriormishu_warrior Posts: 6Registered Users
    After more thinking about it, I go all in for "Total War: 1066" or a game that takes place in those years. There is a lot of stuff happening that year, not only Hastings, 3 major factions, clash of cultures, etc...

    "it’s another spiritual follow-up to Total War: ROME II, like Total War: ATTILA, and moves the time period forward in much the same way"
    rome 2 major campaign starts in 272 bc
    attila major campaign starts in 395
    so we have 700 years between....add 700 years to attila and you get about 1100.

    Can't write much now, but I found a decent amount of arguments for supporting a "Total War: 1066".

  • LESAMALESAMA Member Posts: 1,148Registered Users
    ESKEHL said:

    LESAMA said:



    I personally would like an upgraded Rome 2 with better diplomatic options, battles, sieges, trade etc. Unfortunately I don't think that's going to happen :(

    I agree! Recently started up Rome II with Haegemonia mod and now the grand campaign is actually playable. I got to say that adding a population mechanic, improving internal politics and adding some of the features from Attila such as governors. Do all this in a patch and the game would be awesome
    DEI mod ROME II is also worth a try.
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    LESAMA said:



    DEI mod ROME II is also worth a try.

    I´ve tried DEI, however Haegemonia has the population mechanic together with 4 turns per year. That`s one of the reasons I´m playing that one currently.
    Post edited by ESKEHL on
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users

    After more thinking about it, I go all in for "Total War: 1066" or a game that takes place in those years. There is a lot of stuff happening that year, not only Hastings, 3 major factions, clash of cultures, etc...

    I would say that 1066 is a to narrow scope for a TW Saga game. It would be much more interesting looking at Normandic conquests as a whole. The screenshot of the campaign map shows a small strip of Irish coast in what seems like a big British Isles map. If that is the case Viking Invasions is a more likely scenario in this first TW Saga installment. However, from such a game, I wouldn`t rule out grand campaign focusing on Normandic conquests?

    Historically, their involvements can be seen in conquering sicily from the arabs with papal approval to sporadic conquests of southern Italy lead by the norman Robert Guiscard. These conquests later became known as the Kingdom of Sicily. After this they waged war of conquest against the Byzantine Empire. Later on, Bohemund, the son of Robert Guiscard, ended up in the first crusade to come to the Byzantines relief when they faced the seljuk turkish conquest of Asia Minor. After the crusaders seige of Antioch had been won, Bohemund stayed behind proclaiming himself as the ruler of Antioch and became the founder of the principlaity of Antioch.

    A DLC to this yet unannounced, speculative "TW Saga: Vikings" could be, as I said above, a Grand campaign focusing on the viking descendants, the normands, and their conquests in the midst of clash of civilisations. In Europe, the papacy tries to rally western Europe against the Islamic realms. In the east, seljuk turks move closer to Constantinople. In the middle of this normans joins war of conquests in Europe, in Balkans and later on in the Levant.

  • LESAMALESAMA Member Posts: 1,148Registered Users
    ESKEHL said:


    LESAMA said:



    DEI mod ROME II is also worth a try.

    I´ve tried DEI, however Haegemonia has the population mechanic together with 4 turns per year. That`s one of the reasons I´m playing that one currently.
    Believe dei also has both. Population for sure.

    Would be great if they would add crusades which opens up a lot options with regard to gameplay and faction diversity. Still wouldn't believe it until announced...

  • BennyMendtBennyMendt Senior Member Posts: 297Registered Users

    There has never been a TW game set in the 17th century, apart from a tiny bit of Shogun and Shogun 2 (Sengoku Jidai ended 1603). That's why the period is one of the favourite guesses for the new main historical game.

    Certainly.Many historians consider the 17th century as a turning point in the evolution of a modern state system in Europe. Or/and the 16th century, a major turning point in global history. The Age of Exploration, the Age of Reformation, The Age of Religious wars, The Thirty years war. Colonial conflicts, competition between European powers in Asia, Africa, Americas. China and the 17th century crisis.
    A very rich period in global history.



  • tombergrtombergr Posts: 3Registered Users
    I also agree that the gameplay of the 17th century would bring a very nice revival into the Total Wars series.
  • masterslaymasterslay Junior Member Posts: 43Registered Users
    So think we can at last get the kawagoe castle historical battle for shogun 2, now that you are being so generous on your 30th anniversary and going back to past total war titles?
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users
    edited August 2017
    I know many of you guys want a Medieval III. Especially you guys talking about a 1066 scenario. I gotta say, Medieval Kingdoms mod is pretty much shaping up to be as close to a sequel to Medieval II as we can get.

    I only hope that CA realizes the potential of this mod and helps them out. I`for one wouldn`t mind if the Medieval Kingdoms team were recruited by CA to either realize their mod as a campaign DLC for Attila or as standalone game. For me a DLC could work if you could add specific features to Attila DLC such as the papacy and crusades.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonPosts: 3,012Registered Users
    I made a pilgrimage to King Harold's tomb at the weekend:




    As I approached it, I hearkened to a ghostly whisper on the wind. It spoke thusly:

    "Whether or not the next game will be based around the Norman Invasion, I can neither confirm nor deny... but it will be arriving sooooooon™"

    Pretty sure it was just @CA_Whelan trolling me from a nearby bush tbh
  • Sughdian WarriorSughdian Warrior Senior Member Posts: 187Registered Users
    Another week... another Twitch streaming Warhammer battle... another Warhammer tweet...
    Come on CA, get real already. For months on now the historical fans have not deserved anything but quarterly vagueness.
  • SuliotSuliot Senior Member Posts: 685Registered Users
    I don't expect them to announce anything until they've released TW:WARHAMMER 2.
  • AxelradAxelrad Senior Member Posts: 632Registered Users
    edited August 2017
    Suliot said:

    I don't expect them to announce anything until they've released TW:WARHAMMER 2.

    Same, honestly. The release of Warhammer 2 is just over a month away and that time is sure to be all scheduled and paced out with news and highlights for that game. Showing another major project right before it releases would just distract from the hype CA wants to build.

    I imagine that the Saga title will start getting a lot of news and reveals once Warhammer 2 is out and making money.
  • FerdiadLivesFerdiadLives Posts: 65Registered Users
    edited August 2017
    Gayans said:

    I think maybe you're right, but why they give us a picture of Ireland and not of England ?

    Probably because Ireland is equally a main part of the upcoming title. The Irish part of the campaign will likely focus on the Gaelic-Norse wars, the Irish-Irish wars, and the Norse-Gael people.
  • FerdiadLivesFerdiadLives Posts: 65Registered Users
    edited August 2017
    ESKEHL said:

    Probably to trick us

    Doubt trickery. It's to tease Ireland and Britain. There were massive Viking wars in Ireland too you know. For a fandom of history games it is daunting to see such ignorance. present
  • ESKEHLESKEHL Senior Member Posts: 482Registered Users

    Doubt trickery. It's to tease Ireland and Britain. There were massive Viking wars in Ireland too you know.

    When I said trick us, I meant showing a part of a coast line not usually seen and hence not obvious. If you show a part of the island of Great Britain it would have been obvious of which part of the world it is set in and you could pretty much logically conclude it was a british isles map and that it would be viking invasion themed game.

    For a fandom of history games it is daunting to see such ignorance. present

    IF you`ve would have read the comment above the one you quoted you would have seen:
    ESKEHL said:

    Yeah, it seems like the coast of Ireland which hints of a large British isles mapp. And since CA has hinted a return to a setting they have previously visited but haven't done enough justice, the only thing I can think of that fits in with the TW Saga series description is a standalone sequel to Medieval: Total War - Viking Invasion.

    Note the word british isles. That usually includes all of Great Britain and Ireland.
  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,386Registered Users
    Or: it's an inconspicuous part of the map that made for a nice backdrop, and people are entirely over-analyzing.

    IF it is set in the British Isles, 6th c. could be just as good an option - multiple Celtic factions, Roman legacy faction, Anglo-Saxon factions all competing for dominance; and a much clearer link to the Roman era as well. And there could well be other options.

    TL/DR: we don't actually know anything, so don't get fixated on things that haven't been announced.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonPosts: 3,012Registered Users
    tak22 said:

    Or: it's an inconspicuous part of the map that made for a nice backdrop, and people are entirely over-analyzing.

    IF it is set in the British Isles, 6th c. could be just as good an option - multiple Celtic factions, Roman legacy faction, Anglo-Saxon factions all competing for dominance; and a much clearer link to the Roman era as well. And there could well be other options.

    TL/DR: we don't actually know anything, so don't get fixated on things that haven't been announced.

    Too late for me - I'm fully hyped for a Viking Invasion game now :D

    (please CA, make it so)
  • VessingerVessinger Senior Member Posts: 936Registered Users
    Well, it's nice to get some historical title news for a change, albeit still rather vague in nature. I do appreciate them waiting to announce things until they're somewhat close to release, even if it is still hard to be patient. Unlike some titles *cough* M&B II *cough* that announce their games years in advance of release, which I find rather annoying.

  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,590Registered Users
    edited August 2017
    Please tell us the setting of upcoming historical content....


  • elegiaelegia Posts: 1Registered Users
    please add to the game Rome-Attila the hotseat mode .
    even as paid dlc . there are many players willing to play in this mode . and I among one of them . please do not ignore my idea . for this I had to buy an old game medieval total war 2 kingdoms
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,590Registered Users
    edited August 2017
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonPosts: 3,012Registered Users


    This is so excellent
Sign In or Register to comment.