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

CA please don't Abandon the Historical Fans

2»

Comments

  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 10,967
    psychoak said:

    Troy is NOT historical TW.

    Three Kingdoms is NOT historical TW.

    They catogorized as Historical by CA.

  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    Paddy234 said:


    Don't know where my original reply to this went. As for a game at the scale of Empire offering more diversity than Three Kingdoms just being my opinion, i'm sorry i disagree and perhaps you misunderstood but the reason Empire appeals to many more diverse people and held a consistently strong player base for so many years was because it spanned over several continents involving quite a number of nations, cultures and historical periods to dive into across the world. Of course many more people are going to relate to this than the period of the Three Kingdoms.

    It is alright to disagree, this is just a discussion...
    With the unit and faction diversity, I would say, that Empire and Three Kingdoms are on very similar level - in 3K are leaders with generic Chinese units and leader's unique units + yellow turbans, bandits, and nanmans; in Empire, the most nations are generic European nations with common units + Ottomans, India and North American nations
    But I understand Your point, the Empire offers grand strategy within world, and 3K is set only in China, but this is game's concept, both Empire and 3K have own

    Again, I need to remind You, this is just Your personal preferences; and with all respect, the Three Kingdoms is not directly targeting You (or me), 3K is not TW game about conflict involving a number of nations with diverse armies, but about Three Kingdoms era events
    Here I found a list of Three Kingdoms lore in pop-culture
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_media_adaptations_of_Romance_of_the_Three_Kingdoms
    There are many films, television series, manga, video games etc , and it is very popular in China, Japan, Korea, Singapore... I would say, that 3K is targeting there, and also, there is mentioned "stable player base" ,
    Paddy234 said:


    As for claiming there has been plenty of historical titles since Warhammer, all the titles you mentioned apart from Three Kingdoms are DLC's, even Thrones of Britannia is essentially a standalone Britannia Campaign add on for Atilla, in fact even Three Kingdoms, it's main title wasn't fully an historical title and dabbled with Fantasy elements.

    okay, lets be clear with Three Kingdoms - it has 2 modes, Romance and Records
    1/ in records mode it is "fully historical title", and I need to accentuate - even if 3K does not fit your personal preferences, it does not change the fact, it is based on real historical events, and setting is "purely historical"
    2/ only the romance mode has the mentioned "fantasy elements" , and certainly, these are single unit kung-fu heroes with superpowers
    the option which mode to play, is on the player - I do not like romance mode and I just ignore it,

    Thrones of Britannia, well, it is standalone "historical" title, not an add on for Atilla,
    the dark age viking setting is similar to Attila (especially close to Age of Charlemagne campaign), but campaign mechanics are very different from Attila and ToB is very innovative title within TW series

    The fact is, The Creative Assembly is still doing the "historical titles". even they are focusing on Warhammer trilogy,
    Paddy234 said:


    As for steam numbers? What site are you looking at? It currently gets around 10,000 players a day, down from a peak of just under 200,000. Face it no-one is playing Three Kingdoms anymore and Rome 2 has a similar amount of players on steam despite being almost 10 years old, again why do you think that is? Perhaps a lack of replabiility? https://steamcharts.com/app/779340#All

    I am checking "steamcharts.com",
    lets check Three Kingdoms - https://steamcharts.com/app/779340#All
    April 2021 - 2 years after release - Avg. Players 7,217.6 Peak Players 15,271
    April 2020 - 1 year after release - Avg. Players 9,800.5 Peak Players 28,411

    now Empire Total War, this is tricky, because it was released in 2009, but steam charts show numbers from August 2012
    https://steamcharts.com/app/10500#All

    April 2021 - Avg. Players 2,579.1 Peak Players 4,695
    April 2020 - Avg. Players 3,545.2 Peak Players 6,048
    October 2016 random Avg. Players 2,847.6 Peak Players 5,342
    January 2013 highest number Avg. Players 5,325.5 Peak Players 10,207

    This shows, that the Empire never even had numbers of steam players like Three kingdoms,
    Three Kingdoms is very popular, because its lore, what I mentioned before

    about Rome II - I consider the classical antiquity era as most popular setting, (followed by medieval) that is reason why R2 has high number of players after years, in my opinion,
    and R2 is very good TW game after "empire divided" patches
  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    jamreal18 said:

    psychoak said:

    Troy is NOT historical TW.

    Three Kingdoms is NOT historical TW.

    They catogorized as Historical by CA.

    Warhammer is Fantasy
    -------
    Three Kingdoms in Romance mode
    Troy
    Rome I Remastered

    are "hybrid" historical games with fantasy aspects
    -------
    Three Kingdoms in Records is historical

    it is based on real historical events:

    Three kingdoms is real historical era
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Kingdoms
    events are historical:
    Fall of the Han dynasty
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_the_Han_dynasty
    Yellow Turban Rebellion
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Turban_Rebellion
    Campaign against Dong Zhuo
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_against_Dong_Zhuo

    The protagonist are same "historical" characters within Chinese history like Julius Caesar, Mark Antony, Cleopatra within Roman history

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cao_Cao - Cao Cao
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Bei - Liu Bei
  • united84united84 Registered Users Posts: 981
    edited May 7
    While some people argue about TW3K lacked diversity. Others would opined that the European continent as a campaign map is too repetitive. We have got Medieval 2 - Empire - Napoleon - Shogun 2 - Rome 2 - Atilla - Thrones - TW3K - Troy. Majority of which are set in Europe.

    I like a change from Europe -> Japan -> China on the campaign map. While TW3K is a good game. I hope CA would expand a TW to include China, Japan, Korea, parts of central asia and the Steppes, maybe parts of Vietnam as well.
  • Paddy234Paddy234 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 457
    united84 said:

    While some people argue about TW3K lacked diversity. Others would opined that the European continent as a campaign map is too repetitive. We have got Medieval 2 - Empire - Napoleon - Shogun 2 - Rome 2 - Atilla - Thrones - TW3K - Troy. Majority of which are set in Europe.

    I like a change from Europe -> Japan -> China on the campaign map. While TW3K is a good game. I hope CA would expand a TW to include China, Japan, Korea, parts of central asia and the Steppes, maybe parts of Vietnam as well.

    I wouldn't mind the lacking diversity part, it's the fact the gap between the main historical games is growing meaning the lack of replayabilty hits harder when you have to wait longer before the next game.
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 1,075
    united84 said:

    While some people argue about TW3K lacked diversity. Others would opined that the European continent as a campaign map is too repetitive. We have got Medieval 2 - Empire - Napoleon - Shogun 2 - Rome 2 - Atilla - Thrones - TW3K - Troy. Majority of which are set in Europe.

    I like a change from Europe -> Japan -> China on the campaign map. While TW3K is a good game. I hope CA would expand a TW to include China, Japan, Korea, parts of central asia and the Steppes, maybe parts of Vietnam as well.


    I agree with you for the most part.

    I think that a Medieval 3 could certainly be a fun game, the factions' armies would feel really similar to each other.


    Though I think that that's a benefit to the era we know as Antiquity.

    The armies and cultures were a lot more varied back then.

    I mean, there's only one Sparta, and I think that they could make many cultures feel different from each other in a lot of major ways.
  • psychoakpsychoak Registered Users Posts: 3,414
    jamreal18 said:

    psychoak said:

    Troy is NOT historical TW.

    Three Kingdoms is NOT historical TW.

    They catogorized as Historical by CA.

    They could categorize that alien shooter as a historical TW too.

    I don't know if you guys haven't played Records mode or what. I have, because Romance mode was just terrible garbage where the heavy duty combat characters would just waltz across the field of battle.

    I ran a game with Zeng Jiang. A nice, intermediate ass kicker. She routinely does 300 kills. Her starting Sentinel is usually good for 200 when you use him to scrape off enemy ranged units, but he's not even half as tough. He can just barely eat enemy cavalry for breakfast, can't fight standard Champions or Vanguards solo. Zeng Jiang can eat them for breakfast, two on one. A battle I fought a few weeks back had a Champion and two Vanguards, with eight or nine units of medium cavalry. I had Zeng Jiang and her Sentinel. I won the cavalry battle. Zeng Jiang killed most of them, and all three opposing characters as well, ended the battle 400+ kills up.

    Lu Bu makes Zeng Jiang look like a chump. To kill him I needed multiple units, including Zeng Jiang, to cycle charge while his cavalry ate a couple units of spearmen. In Records mode. He racked up over 500 kills even after the AI hung back until most of their units were already dead, and then charged into a pile of spear bandits. After I killed his entire bodyguard, he was still slaughtering my troops. I lost two thirds of my bodyguards.

    Bodyguard units they may be, but they're still not the typical general bodyguard units of historical TW. Some of them are murder hobo's with a few inches of plot armor. This isn't even remotely close to Shogun, where you rear charge Yari Ashigaru and he dies 15 seconds later.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,746
    psychoak said:

    jamreal18 said:

    psychoak said:

    Troy is NOT historical TW.

    Three Kingdoms is NOT historical TW.

    They catogorized as Historical by CA.

    They could categorize that alien shooter as a historical TW too.

    I don't know if you guys haven't played Records mode or what. I have, because Romance mode was just terrible garbage where the heavy duty combat characters would just waltz across the field of battle.

    I ran a game with Zeng Jiang. A nice, intermediate ass kicker. She routinely does 300 kills. Her starting Sentinel is usually good for 200 when you use him to scrape off enemy ranged units, but he's not even half as tough. He can just barely eat enemy cavalry for breakfast, can't fight standard Champions or Vanguards solo. Zeng Jiang can eat them for breakfast, two on one. A battle I fought a few weeks back had a Champion and two Vanguards, with eight or nine units of medium cavalry. I had Zeng Jiang and her Sentinel. I won the cavalry battle. Zeng Jiang killed most of them, and all three opposing characters as well, ended the battle 400+ kills up.

    Lu Bu makes Zeng Jiang look like a chump. To kill him I needed multiple units, including Zeng Jiang, to cycle charge while his cavalry ate a couple units of spearmen. In Records mode. He racked up over 500 kills even after the AI hung back until most of their units were already dead, and then charged into a pile of spear bandits. After I killed his entire bodyguard, he was still slaughtering my troops. I lost two thirds of my bodyguards.

    Bodyguard units they may be, but they're still not the typical general bodyguard units of historical TW. Some of them are murder hobo's with a few inches of plot armor. This isn't even remotely close to Shogun, where you rear charge Yari Ashigaru and he dies 15 seconds later.
    That's down to cavalry having vastly overblown damage output on the charge. But that's not a problem of 3K exclusively, R1, M2 and TWA had the same balance issue.

  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    For me, the battles in 3K records are similar to Attila
    The Cavalry and general unit is powerful, but it is in Rome 1, Medieval 2 and especially in Attila too, ShiroAmakusa75 wrote it first
    Shogun 2 has one of the weakest cavalry within TW games and spear ashigaru is very strong

    I do not want to claim, that battles in 3K records are properly balanced,

    but the game setting itself is "historical" in all sense
  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    Paddy234 said:


    I wouldn't mind the lacking diversity part, it's the fact the gap between the main historical games is growing meaning the lack of replayabilty hits harder when you have to wait longer before the next game.

    This year we will get Age of Empires IV and Knights of Honor II, if You like medieval, maybe it would be your cup of tea

    perhaps it would sound bitter, but The Creative Assembly does not have duty to develop certain TW games in certain period

    and this is not "historical" games vs. Warhammer, some people want only Empire 2 and some people only Medieval 3, other want "Victoria" - set in19th century, and I want "Pike and Shot",

    Why would CA abandon their customer base?
    I am curious, what TW game will come after Warhammer trilogy
  • Paddy234Paddy234 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 457
    edited May 8
    Lotor12 said:

    Paddy234 said:


    I wouldn't mind the lacking diversity part, it's the fact the gap between the main historical games is growing meaning the lack of replayabilty hits harder when you have to wait longer before the next game.

    This year we will get Age of Empires IV and Knights of Honor II, if You like medieval, maybe it would be your cup of tea

    perhaps it would sound bitter, but The Creative Assembly does not have duty to develop certain TW games in certain period

    and this is not "historical" games vs. Warhammer, some people want only Empire 2 and some people only Medieval 3, other want "Victoria" - set in19th century, and I want "Pike and Shot",

    Why would CA abandon their customer base?
    I am curious, what TW game will come after Warhammer trilogy
    Of course CA do not have a duty to develop certain TW games, that wasn't my point, this thread is a plea with them not to abandon a section of their fanbase as they move ever further down an area where Large Scale historical games are becoming more rare. As for where they could go after Warhammer, plenty of places as on the other hand it would be silly of them to abandon their fantasy fanbase who now make up a core section.

    My issues were that CA said the development of the fantasy games would have no impact on the historical teams however we now know thats not true. The gap between MAIN historical games (not saga's or DLC's) has grown meanwhile Warhammer 1.2 and 3 with it's DLC's and constant updates has been the main focus of the last few years. Three Kingdoms is the last major historical titles since Attila, thats a big gap. I was also having issues with how they still tried to deploy fantasy elements in Three Kingdoms and Troy with Troy being the most arcade type TW yet. It really does feel they are afraid to go all in with a grand historical game like they did many years ago.

    I get it, after their last few historical titles (prior to Three Kingdoms) having rough launch's they got hit hard by their fanbase. When Warhammer released it got constant praise at how innovative it was and CA massively increased their player base. Currently more people play Warhammer than Three Kingdoms, i'm sure CA know very well where the money is however i feel that is largely down to a lack of innovation especially with battles in the historical games which at least make fantasy battles feel more exciting and less repetitive with the different races involved and magic. i love Warhammer, this isn't an attack on the fantasy games but a plea not to give up on large scale historical titles by giving fewer resources to it's teams meaning MAIN historical titles become more rare
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 1,075
    Lotor12 said:

    For me, the battles in 3K records are similar to Attila
    The Cavalry and general unit is powerful, but it is in Rome 1, Medieval 2 and especially in Attila too, ShiroAmakusa75 wrote it first
    Shogun 2 has one of the weakest cavalry within TW games and spear ashigaru is very strong

    I do not want to claim, that battles in 3K records are properly balanced,

    but the game setting itself is "historical" in all sense

    I disagree.

    Shogun 2's cavalry could be really powerful, but only if you used it right.

    I mean, Katana Cavalry could carve right through a unit if they hit the flank or rear of a unit.
  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445



    I disagree.

    Shogun 2's cavalry could be really powerful, but only if you used it right.

    I mean, Katana Cavalry could carve right through a unit if they hit the flank or rear of a unit.

    It is maybe misunderstand,
    I did not want to say, that cavalry in Shogun 2 is weak
    But if You compare how the cavalry work in battles in Shogun II and Attila, there is big difference
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 1,075
    Lotor12 said:


    It is maybe misunderstand,
    I did not want to say, that cavalry in Shogun 2 is weak
    But if You compare how the cavalry work in battles in Shogun II and Attila, there is big difference

    Yeah, cavalry in Rome 2 and Attila can be pretty ridiculous at times. Especially Shock Cav.

    I truly hate Shock Cav.

    There have been times where I charged a unit of shock cav with a unit of melee cav, and they weren't able to get off their charge, and my cav lost.

    How stupid is that?
  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    edited May 11
    @Paddy234
    I see Your point if view,
    but I really do not understand, why do You see it in "black-and-white" way, like strictly "historical" vs. "fantasy"
    Paddy234 said:


    My issues were that CA said the development of the fantasy games would have no impact on the historical teams however we now know thats not true. The gap between MAIN historical games (not saga's or DLC's) has grown meanwhile Warhammer 1.2 and 3 with it's DLC's and constant updates has been the main focus of the last few years. Three Kingdoms is the last major historical titles since Attila, thats a big gap. I was also having issues with how they still tried to deploy fantasy elements in Three Kingdoms and Troy

    Dude, You can blame CA for it, but You do not understand, that they do not have a duty to develop any specific TW game in specific intervals,

    What to say? if You do not like the mechanic of single unit superheroes, You can play 3K in records mode, and just ignore the romance mode in 3K and Troy

    The setting of Troy is not really "historical", Odysseus, Achilles, the prince Hector and the other protagonists are not historical characters , but mythological
    --------------------

    Try to look from different perspective,

    I think, that the potential of Warhammer setting is coming to end with the upcoming WH3 and DLCs,

    If there will be another TW game with magic, creatures, and single unit superheroes after WH3, it would not "beat" previous WH trilogy,

    CA needs to change the setting in their TW games , like after Gunpowder era (Empire, Napoleon, Fall of Samurai) came ancient era (Rome II, Attila), and after it came the Warhammer setting


    EDIT:
    I see now, that You posted AdmiralPrince's video on previous page, so I guess, where all of this come from
    Post edited by Lotor12 on
  • Paddy234Paddy234 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 457
    Lotor12 said:

    @Paddy234
    I see Your point if view,
    but I really do not understand, why do You see it in "black-and-white" way, like strictly "historical" vs. "fantasy"


    Paddy234 said:


    My issues were that CA said the development of the fantasy games would have no impact on the historical teams however we now know thats not true. The gap between MAIN historical games (not saga's or DLC's) has grown meanwhile Warhammer 1.2 and 3 with it's DLC's and constant updates has been the main focus of the last few years. Three Kingdoms is the last major historical titles since Attila, thats a big gap. I was also having issues with how they still tried to deploy fantasy elements in Three Kingdoms and Troy

    Dude, You can blame CA for it, but You do not understand, that they do not have a duty to develop any specific TW game in specific intervals,

    What to say? if You do not like the mechanic of single unit superheroes, You can play 3K in records mode, and just ignore the romance mode in 3K and Troy

    The setting of Troy is not really "historical", Odysseus, Achilles, the prince Hector and the other protagonists are not historical characters , but mythological
    --------------------

    Try to look from different perspective,

    I think, that the potential of Warhammer setting is coming to end with the upcoming WH3 and DLCs,

    If there will be another TW game with magic, creatures, and single unit superheroes after WH3, it would not "beat" previous WH trilogy,

    CA needs to change the setting in their TW games , like after Gunpowder era (Empire, Napoleon, Fall of Samurai) came ancient era (Rome II, Attila), and after it came the Warhammer setting


    EDIT:
    I see now, that You posted AdmiralPrince's video on previous page, so I guess, where all of this come from

    It actually spawned before this lol, i see his videos only recently as i wanted to do a bit of research on future TW games. I agree with most of his points however
  • Lotor12Lotor12 Registered Users Posts: 445
    edited May 14
    Paddy234 said:


    It actually spawned before this lol, i see his videos only recently as i wanted to do a bit of research on future TW games. I agree with most of his points however

    As More I watch his videos, I more see him as demagogue :smiley: He purposely ignores and change facts in that video, but i do not want to dig in

    Anyway , we just need to be patient, what TW game will come after Warhammer III
    CA is trying to expand the franchise with Warhammer and Three Kingdoms which is a good thing, and probably it will help to develop future "historical" titles - with money from costumers, and design experience; lets be honest, there were many mistakes in Rome 2 and Attila

    From the forums, comments, and discussions, the most requested titles are Empire 2 and Medieval 3

Sign In or Register to comment.