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

Announcing a New Total War Era

1234568»

Comments

  • tak22tak22 Senior Member Posts: 2,380Registered Users
    1. Empire, in the new terminology, is an 'era'. It spans 100 years. Shogun 2 is also an 'era'; it spans about 50 years. Time span has nothing to do with whether something is an 'era' - it's simply CA's term for a 'tentpole' game.

    2. China is about the same size as Europe.

    3. We haven't seen a map yet, so we don't know if they're including anything outside of China proper (which IMO would make sense).
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Posts: 1,139Registered Users
    Nemi1500 said:


    Firstly, the Rome 2 game can’t be a Saga title because it focuses on an extended period of history (3-400 years) AND on a large section of the Classically known world at that time (ie: Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. For all the flaws of Rome 2 upon release, the cultural diversity was distinct, interesting, and encouraged campaign replay-ability.
    As CA have mentioned on a few occasions, Saga games focus on specific moments - flash points if you will - in history. When a specific area of the world was in conflict, or when a hero/leader rose to prominence.
    Yes, within Rome 2 the Ceasre in Gaul expansion, the Augustus Campaign (sorry, forgotten it’s actually name) ect, and certainly Attila could all be considered Saga games because THEY look at specific people/periods over a limited timeframe and geographical setting. Please also note that these games came out before CA set up their Saga development team, and therefore a game like Attila would only qualify as a Saga title if released today.

    It's not a saga, Rome 2 isn't either that's my point. Personally it didn't make replayability any better than Shogun 2 (which also still has a higher rating than Rome 2) as they were just reskins on the most part with the main difference being the location. 3K can easily do that as well, they also have a huge area. Just because you haven't looked in to the region and history doesn't change the size of it.

    Rome 2 focus is on the rise of the Roman empire so it can be viewed as a saga just as much. I'd also doubt Attila would be a saga due to the sheer size of the game. If it had focused just on Attilas attack on the Western Roman empire then sure.
    Nemi1500 said:


    Now I’m curious, how does the 3 Kingdoms period, approximately 100 years long and located basically within China NOT qualify as a Saga game? How the hell does such a limited period and region merit a full historical title release when such a large portion of the fan base have been begging for a larger game in the ME3/E2/Victorian/Pike and Shot periods for the last 5 years? A game that would examine a range of cultures and regions over a longer period and enable Saga spin offs like a 3K title!

    Again it's not limited. It's not focused and it's not small scale. The map is still huge. There's still going to be a lot of different starting points and there can still be a range of units and multiple other nations from around China.

    No more have been begging for those periods than have been calling for a China based game. If 3K is a spinoff then so would E2 and a P&S be spin offs of M3 and V.
    Nemi1500 said:


    Secondly, Empire didn’t burn CA. It is one of its most popular titles to date, with sales skyrocketing over the last few years. In fact, I’m pretty certain it was the highest selling TW game as of 12 months ago. Yes, you’re right, it has MAJOR issues. The AI was/is a disgrace; there are some serious historical inaccuracies; the European factions are all very similar; and let’s not get started on the engine - particularly hand to hand combat!
    And for all of those issues, it is by far the most innovative, interesting and IMO enjoyable title CA have released to date with the exception of Rome 1.

    It did, CA took a lot of flack for the results of Empire and did say a number of mistakes were made for it. Selling lots of units isn't much when it's been out so long and sold for such small sums. Devs focus on the pre-order and first few weeks which has WH1 as the best selling TW to date.

    These did hit them, and they admitted the sheer scale of trying to make such a huge map was a problem and that they want to steer away from doing that again. Smaller focuses lets them make more depth and do more justice to the region.
    Nemi1500 said:


    Why? Because it makes the sandbox experience global. It expanded the series in so many ways. While it mightn’t go for a long period in time, it included different cultures, it had significant technology expansions, naval combat was introduced, it made you feel like you were playing through a major period in history! It moved TW forwards!

    Issue was more developers than the series history. It caused a lot of problems at release and stressed the Developers, they were never able to get it how they wanted and caused internal issues.
    Nemi1500 said:


    Thirdly, I don’t think a world map would require the type of trilogy of maps that we’re receiving in WH. The Regions method used in Empire would work just as well if they were expanded to include Asia and S.America. Removing the Trading Regions could accomplish this easily. Plenty of ways around the issue.

    It's not the issue of zoning but of development time and cost. The games are costing more to develop and if you want even more regions and cultures and keep them unique and not just a recolour of like 5 nations (slightly more than Empire) it would need to be done as packs rather than a single game.
  • JacquestheApostateJacquestheApostate Senior Member Posts: 559Registered Users
    Commisar said:

    Nemi1500 said:

    JacquestheApostate:

    “Your post on this thread only proves how little you know about the Chinese culture.”


    Actually it proves I’ve been playing TW games for years, watched them expand and improve with each new major title except Shogun 2 (as much as I enjoyed it), and that I and many others were looking forward to a major historical release, not a Sagas title packaged as a major historical game. Instead we’re getting a game in a limited region that will likely only focus on China during a very specific dynasty/period.
    After such a long wait for a major historical game, I would have hoped for a title that examined a larger area (at least the Asian region, if not the entire World) or a game that looks at a longer period of history.

    I’m pleased you’re getting a game that you and others have been asking for for years. I’m pleased CA are finally looking at China and Chinese history. But as a major historical title, this IS a step backwards. That’s what I’m upset about.
    3 Kingdoms would have been a great Sagas game, even if it was based off the Attila framework. But as a major release? Hell no!
    It's no more of a saga than Rome 2 and is far less of a saga than that of Attila.

    China is no more a limited region than Europe.

    Expecting a TW to cover the world doesn't seem likely. On Empire got close and that burned CA and with performance issues and complaints over lack of depth having larger areas in a single game release shows you haven't followed the community. Would require a WH style expansion to get close with the depth and cost of such a map.

    Also Shogun 2 has been better received than the recent historical TWs.

    I have been playing for years too. Yes I am happy it's coming out, but as usual CA total lack of communication does nothing for the TW community. I had to wait years for this title and not once did I go on the Warhammer forums and complain like I am seeing on the 3K forum about it should of been Victorian or Med III. Enough already! CA's biggest problem is lack of communication! When you think about it, it's the easiest thing they could do. How much would it literally cost CA to communicate on this forum?
    Answer: Nothing!
    It would certainly cut down on the negativity. I am just hoping for the best when this title is released, not another Rome II.
    Looking forward to Three Kingdoms big time. Warhammer was never my thing.
    Shogun II Avatar Campaign is the most fun I have had with Total War games!
    Gun Cav in Shogun II should have a Retainer!
    Give us another Avatar Campaign!
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Posts: 1,139Registered Users


    I have been playing for years too. Yes I am happy it's coming out, but as usual CA total lack of communication does nothing for the TW community. I had to wait years for this title and not once did I go on the Warhammer forums and complain like I am seeing on the 3K forum about it should of been Victorian or Med III. Enough already! CA's biggest problem is lack of communication! When you think about it, it's the easiest thing they could do. How much would it literally cost CA to communicate on this forum?
    Answer: Nothing!
    It would certainly cut down on the negativity. I am just hoping for the best when this title is released, not another Rome II.

    Yeah they aren't the best at talking to the community, Jack is active in a few threads for ToB at least which is nice, hopefully other projects will have staff do so.

    I'd also say this again, this helps pave the way for a future Victoria TW as finally CA are doing the big chunk of Asia that's been missed from all the previous ones.
  • IntranetusaIntranetusa Junior Member Posts: 505Registered Users
    Nemi1500 said:

    Firstly, the Rome 2 game can’t be a Saga title because it focuses on an extended period of history (3-400 years) AND on a large section of the Classically known world at that time (ie: Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. For all the flaws of Rome 2 upon release, the cultural diversity was distinct, interesting, and encouraged campaign replay-ability.

    Shogun 1 and 2 are far more limited in timeframe and geography, yet they're both full fledged games. Rome 2's actual units all played the same - they were all just different colored spearmanni. Even the hoplites played the same as most other spear units due to game engine limitations or bad design choices.
    Nemi1500 said:

    Yes, within Rome 2 the Ceasre in Gaul expansion, the Augustus Campaign (sorry, forgotten it’s actually name) ect, and certainly Attila could all be considered Saga games because THEY look at specific people/periods over a limited timeframe and geographical setting. Please also note that these games came out before CA set up their Saga development team, and therefore a game like Attila would only qualify as a Saga title if released today..

    Caesar in Gaul and Augustus were not Saga games. They were just small campaign DLC add ons that took place within the timeframe of Rome2. Attila TW on the other hand was 400 years later and the region had changed enough and new cultures had arisen - it would've been impossible to represent 5th century AD Europe with Rome2 that started in the 2nd/3rd century BC.

    Attila was not a limited geographical setting. It was the same campaign map as Rome 2. Attila had a bunch of
    Nemi1500 said:

    Now I’m curious, how does the 3 Kingdoms period, approximately 100 years long and located basically within China NOT qualify as a Saga game? How the hell does such a limited period and region merit a full historical title release when such a large portion of the fan base have been begging for a larger game in the ME3/E2/Victorian/Pike and Shot periods for the last 5 years? A game that would examine a range of cultures and regions over a longer period and enable Saga spin offs like a 3K title!

    1) China by itself is the roughly the size of the entire continent of Europe. The Han Dynasty by itself was around 65% of the size of Europe and a bit larger than the Roman Empire. Add in neighboring countries and you easily have a map on the same scale as Rome 2 or Attila.

    2) Is Pike and Shot & Rennisance warfare only possible for a "saga" game because it takes place in Europe?

    3) CA has said a bajillion times through numerous updates, dev interviews, blog updates, etc that this game is a new era and not a sequel. Anybody clamoring for ME3 or Empire 2 for this game are people who never bothered to pay attention to Total War news/updates. Why should CA listen to these people who don't even bother paying attention to news and updates from CA?
  • DasChapDasChap Posts: 7Registered Users
    I'm really looking forward to all the new titles....I will just say I'm surprised that they are all, well...ancient! It might be better to rename the series 'Total Sword' because there aren't going to be any guns for us gun-loving maniacs who love to mow down whole battalions with cold calculated efficiency. I still think the challenge of FOTS was one of the best in all the series, the naval combat was next-level too. Such a different array of strategy and tactics which had to be applied, just seems a bit of a shame it's going to be all about everyone flopping out their swords..again!
  • DasChapDasChap Posts: 7Registered Users
    Or some kind of purple creature-man which can turn enemy archers into a perfect 3/4 size replica of the Flying Scotsman with a quick stare of its +4 mace eyeflaps
  • MagicMonkey243MagicMonkey243 Posts: 140Registered Users
    DasChap said:

    I'm really looking forward to all the new titles....I will just say I'm surprised that they are all, well...ancient! It might be better to rename the series 'Total Sword' because there aren't going to be any guns for us gun-loving maniacs who love to mow down whole battalions with cold calculated efficiency. I still think the challenge of FOTS was one of the best in all the series, the naval combat was next-level too. Such a different array of strategy and tactics which had to be applied, just seems a bit of a shame it's going to be all about everyone flopping out their swords..again!

    For me, FOTS was overrated. The battles were extremely quick and the maps quite small. It basically descended from the intensive strategy required in Napoleon to who could spam the keyboard the fastest. I mean, one single volley from breach loaders could down a third of the unit. Naval combat in Shogun wasn't the best either (far from Napoleon) ... ships caught fire way too easily (which would lead to a massive combustion) and the crew morale was pretty low. I personally don't mind that they are going back to classical times with this installment ... even if this time era has already been explored, the environment is completely new! A lot of Total War fans have been begging for China for a very long time now ...
    "If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door" - Milton Berle
  • MagicMonkey243MagicMonkey243 Posts: 140Registered Users
    Commisar said:


    I have been playing for years too. Yes I am happy it's coming out, but as usual CA total lack of communication does nothing for the TW community. I had to wait years for this title and not once did I go on the Warhammer forums and complain like I am seeing on the 3K forum about it should of been Victorian or Med III. Enough already! CA's biggest problem is lack of communication! When you think about it, it's the easiest thing they could do. How much would it literally cost CA to communicate on this forum?
    Answer: Nothing!
    It would certainly cut down on the negativity. I am just hoping for the best when this title is released, not another Rome II.

    Yeah they aren't the best at talking to the community, Jack is active in a few threads for ToB at least which is nice, hopefully other projects will have staff do so.

    I'd also say this again, this helps pave the way for a future Victoria TW as finally CA are doing the big chunk of Asia that's been missed from all the previous ones.
    If they include Victoria Total War, I can bet you that Asia won't be heavily invovled. They might have some token factions like Maratha but the central focus will probably be in Europe. If CA's going to focus on a large chunk of Asia, it's gotta be based on China . And we've had Europe for way too long ... a completely different setting is like a breathe of fresh air.
    "If opportunity doesn't knock, build a door" - Milton Berle
  • CommisarCommisar Senior Member Posts: 1,139Registered Users

    If they include Victoria Total War, I can bet you that Asia won't be heavily invovled. They might have some token factions like Maratha but the central focus will probably be in Europe. If CA's going to focus on a large chunk of Asia, it's gotta be based on China . And we've had Europe for way too long ... a completely different setting is like a breathe of fresh air.

    Victoria would fit covering pretty much most of the world.
  • BreadboxBreadbox Posts: 574Registered Users
    edited March 2018

    Oh hell yea.

    This era really hit on a lot of extremely critical military advances for China's history. The advent of the crossbow beginning to be the first rival of the bow for effect in war. The last dying points of the chariot as cavalry was found to be much more effective in the tight mountainous regions of China. Armor was beginning to more fully develop as iron became the more common functional metal.

    There was a massive change in military philosphy as well. Traditionally Chinese warfare focused heavily on conflict among armies. Sieges were not as common due to warfare in general not being seen as a good thing. Total annihilation of an enemy was frowned upon. This changed immensely during this time period, with sieges becoming commonplace. Strategies around siege warfare using fire, water, and a variety of seige equipment began to develop. This was critical as the mountains of China made for awesome natural chokepoints for fortifications to prove nigh impenetrable.

    Mini-Necro
    But its honestly kind of funny that the most upvoted post is actually talking about the Transition between Spring and Autumn to the Warring States period,rather than the times of Three Kingdom,which is actually several centuries later :#

    But still,Warring States is more suitable to the traditional TW formula,though Three Kingdom is far more famous and influential.
  • alsaadialsaadi Posts: 18Registered Users
    Hello guys I have noticed that in all games Total War and the Diplomacy is very late and nothing is important and in essence that the Diplomacy is the basis of the advancement and fall I hope the improvement of diplomatic and make the sections of the example of coup planning and network spy and improve the trade and strengthen and make treachery among the Allies and I could instigate factions Attacking other factions without entering the war
1234568»
Sign In or Register to comment.