So whats the focus?

juliusamelius

I just had a look at the fortifications and settlements discussion on this thread and then saw Oakley's video on it and his comments do seem concerning based on what Jack Lusted has said so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SvdsBb-yoc&t=0s

I get that sieges will be different from Atilla and R2, but if this is being built on top of Attila, it seems like featured have been stripped out.

If this is supposed to be a hyper focused campaign on a small region over a small period, where are the resources being dedicated to?

The number of settlements and civs are limited (as expected) and unfortunately. the focus on settlement development also seems limited (unlike M2 Brittania campaign)

so my question in, when they say that this will be a very focused campaign, what aspect of the game is the focus on?

Jack_Lusted_CA

It's certainly been interesting to see how people have interpreted what I said in that thread, and how much has been read into it. The focus of Thrones is on all areas of the game, a lot of time and effort is being spent on the settlement maps to get them as varied as possible.

Yes, there won't be as many different maps as say Rome II if you take into account culture variants + size variants of those settlements, but then Thrones won't cost as much as Rome II.

Let me expand on a couple of the points I said before in a little more detail. I mentioned there will be more than a dozen major settlement maps (again can't quite talk about minors until we reveal more details of the campaign map). I was a bit vague in that number as the game is still being worked on, we're still polishing and testing the maps so the final number might change, but I think there's no harm in that the aim is for there to be 16 different major settlement maps.

These maps will cover settlements with old Roman walls, hillforts, ringforts, Viking ports, some based on promontory forts etc. Each has a unique layout. I said there were no unique settlement maps, I meant there is no settlement map that is used in just one place. We're spreading the maps around so there is good variety across the campaign.

Yes, the settlement maps won't change as the settlement size increases in the campaign, but if we'd done that there would be a lot less variety of maps. Every size variation of a map is the same as making another unique map. The approach we've gone for is all about getting that variety of experience in. The short time frame Thrones covers also means having huge changes to how settlements look doesn't really fit.

steam_163176555790NghxZjA

Great reply, looking forward to when the blog drops about the camping map. Maybe we will see some landmarks on the campaign map like Stonehenge, Lia Fáil, and Hadrian's Wall to give the campaign map it's own regional identity.

AHumpierRogue#5296

@Jack_Lusted_CA I think the problem is people REALLY jumped the gun and went off the deep end and decided to interpret "Sieges won't be like Atilla" to mean "Sieges are like Warhammer", neither of which would make sense for the time period, despite you having just said "Not as much artillery, focuss on melee fighting in the city".

Efix#7927

Attila siege maps were a clear improvement over Rome II

Suliot

People don't seem to understand that the Saga game is basically a spin-off of Attila, made by a smaller team, and that it will cost less than a full priced game. It's basically a stand-alone expansion like Fall of the Samurai.

A lot of people got really excited and started to speculate wildly about everything regarding the game, expecting it to be a revolutionary title that will fulfill all their daydreams about what should be in Total War titles, and you can see it in this forum even.

So when you tell them that the settlements have to be small because that's what they were in the time period, they start to think that CA is doing it on purpose to strip away features. And a lot of negativity is generated for no reason, simply because people misunderstood the whole project.

All I have to say is be reasonable and read the FAQ's and what the developers are saying, don't whip yourselves into a frenzy expecting ToB to be the best total war title that will change everything for the better. Because when the game comes out and it's not 100% perfect and how you imagined it to be, then you will be sorely disappointed and go on to complain and rage about it endlessly.

I personally am very pleased with what I've been reading about the game thus far, I think that Saga titles, due to being cheaper and made with smaller teams, can be used to experiment with new ideas and themes that some would think are risky in a full priced Total War title.

Jam#4399

@Jack_Lusted_CA Pictures please!

juliusamelius

Seems to me that the new campaign mechanic is the focus. If this was to be a smaller game, I was hoping for something new, this seems like it. Thanks for the reply Jack lusted

juliusamelius

Krunch said:

@Jack_Lusted_CA I think the problem is people REALLY jumped the gun and went off the deep end and decided to interpret "Sieges won't be like Atilla" to mean "Sieges are like Warhammer", neither of which would make sense for the time period, despite you having just said "Not as much artillery, focuss on melee fighting in the city".

Thats not my interpretation OR question. I was curious as to what the new feature is.

daelin4#9896

juliusamelius said:

so my question in, when they say that this will be a very focused campaign, what aspect of the game is the focus on?

I believe you are misinterpreting things: the subject matter being discussed was regarding sieges, but for some reason you come to the conclusion of something else; you don't really specify what that is, given the grammatically incorrect sentences you made in OP.

I mean let's start with the beginning: why do you think CA is having some particular focus at all? Where did you draw that conclusion? WHY should a developer ever have a great focus on one particular component of a product? And where did you even get that impression?

If the question is really just "if settlements aren't so particularly designed then where's the resources going to?" The answer is pretty obvious: everything else, because CA doesn't have the budget for a greater scope. Settlement design and sieges aren't exactly the majority of game content, it is no surprise they aren't going to put in half of the game budget on that part of the game alone.

Unless, of course, that half is going to marketing. That might be something worth talking about. Hell, maybe THAT is the main focus of the game.

AHumpierRogue#5296

juliusamelius said:

Krunch said:

@Jack_Lusted_CA I think the problem is people REALLY jumped the gun and went off the deep end and decided to interpret "Sieges won't be like Atilla" to mean "Sieges are like Warhammer", neither of which would make sense for the time period, despite you having just said "Not as much artillery, focuss on melee fighting in the city".

Thats not my interpretation OR question. I was curious as to what the new feature is.

That was in response to Jack saying that reactions to the knowledge of what sieges will be like in ToB has been "interesting" to quote.

Rotarrin

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

These maps will cover settlements with old Roman walls, hillforts, ringforts, Viking ports, some based on promontory forts etc. Each has a unique layout. I said there were no unique settlement maps, I meant there is no settlement map that is used in just one place. We're spreading the maps around so there is good variety across the campaign.

Yes, the settlement maps won't change as the settlement size increases in the campaign, but if we'd done that there would be a lot less variety of maps. Every size variation of a map is the same as making another unique map. The approach we've gone for is all about getting that variety of experience in. The short time frame Thrones covers also means having huge changes to how settlements look doesn't really fit.

I'm going to ask a dumb/obvious question (so as to ensure I'm not making an even dumber assumption): Will these settlement maps be distributed the same way every campaign?

In other words, will Eoferwic (York) always have the "old Roman fort" map (for example)? Or will that change/alternate, and in some campaigns Eoferwic could be assigned the "Viking port" map instead?

Jack_Lusted_CA

Rotarrin said:

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

These maps will cover settlements with old Roman walls, hillforts, ringforts, Viking ports, some based on promontory forts etc. Each has a unique layout. I said there were no unique settlement maps, I meant there is no settlement map that is used in just one place. We're spreading the maps around so there is good variety across the campaign.

Yes, the settlement maps won't change as the settlement size increases in the campaign, but if we'd done that there would be a lot less variety of maps. Every size variation of a map is the same as making another unique map. The approach we've gone for is all about getting that variety of experience in. The short time frame Thrones covers also means having huge changes to how settlements look doesn't really fit.

I'm going to ask a dumb/obvious question (so as to ensure I'm not making an even dumber assumption): Will these settlement maps be distributed the same way every campaign?

In other words, will Eoferwic (York) always have the "old Roman fort" map (for example)? Or will that change/alternate, and in some campaigns Eoferwic could be assigned the "Viking port" map instead?

Yes, the maps for those settlements will always be the same. The places that had Roman walls still in history will have them in the game, the geography of those places isn't going to change between playthroughs.

AdamYahya#5382

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

Rotarrin said:

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

These maps will cover settlements with old Roman walls, hillforts, ringforts, Viking ports, some based on promontory forts etc. Each has a unique layout. I said there were no unique settlement maps, I meant there is no settlement map that is used in just one place. We're spreading the maps around so there is good variety across the campaign.

Yes, the settlement maps won't change as the settlement size increases in the campaign, but if we'd done that there would be a lot less variety of maps. Every size variation of a map is the same as making another unique map. The approach we've gone for is all about getting that variety of experience in. The short time frame Thrones covers also means having huge changes to how settlements look doesn't really fit.

I'm going to ask a dumb/obvious question (so as to ensure I'm not making an even dumber assumption): Will these settlement maps be distributed the same way every campaign?

In other words, will Eoferwic (York) always have the "old Roman fort" map (for example)? Or will that change/alternate, and in some campaigns Eoferwic could be assigned the "Viking port" map instead?

Yes, the maps for those settlements will always be the same. The places that had Roman walls still in history will have them in the game, the geography of those places isn't going to change between playthroughs.

Evsn if different cultures took over the settlement?

Mattzo

LestaT said:

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

Rotarrin said:

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

These maps will cover settlements with old Roman walls, hillforts, ringforts, Viking ports, some based on promontory forts etc. Each has a unique layout. I said there were no unique settlement maps, I meant there is no settlement map that is used in just one place. We're spreading the maps around so there is good variety across the campaign.

Yes, the settlement maps won't change as the settlement size increases in the campaign, but if we'd done that there would be a lot less variety of maps. Every size variation of a map is the same as making another unique map. The approach we've gone for is all about getting that variety of experience in. The short time frame Thrones covers also means having huge changes to how settlements look doesn't really fit.

I'm going to ask a dumb/obvious question (so as to ensure I'm not making an even dumber assumption): Will these settlement maps be distributed the same way every campaign?

In other words, will Eoferwic (York) always have the "old Roman fort" map (for example)? Or will that change/alternate, and in some campaigns Eoferwic could be assigned the "Viking port" map instead?

Yes, the maps for those settlements will always be the same. The places that had Roman walls still in history will have them in the game, the geography of those places isn't going to change between playthroughs.

Evsn if different cultures took over the settlement?

No. Why would it? Cultures are relatively similar in architecture and the game is roughly 50 years - huge changes aren't really appropriate.

Jack_Lusted_CA

LestaT said:

Evsn if different cultures took over the settlement?

Yes, people didn't tend to tear everything town when they took over places in this time period, especially big Roman stone walls.

FranzSaxon

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

LestaT said:

Evsn if different cultures took over the settlement?

Yes, people didn't tend to tear everything town when they took over places in this time period, especially big Roman stone walls.

Thanks jack im so **** hyped. My FAV time period and i was itching to play the Irish or scottish in a TW game. Can I ask you...can you confirm if there's any new combat animations...?!

Efix#7927

Jack_Lusted_CA said:

LestaT said:

Evsn if different cultures took over the settlement?

Yes, people didn't tend to tear everything town when they took over places in this time period, especially big Roman stone walls.

Hadrian wall confirmed !