Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

American expansion pack

2»

Comments

  • RumpullpusRumpullpus Senior Member Posts: 1,216Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    ranknfile wrote: »
    Permit me to disagree with those who think the American Civil war would be boring. It was grand slaughter. I say this never having played the RtI in ETW as I am far more interested in Britain's and France's military as the U.S. was quite the weakling at this time. I also find the clash between Napoleon and his enemies to be the most interesting time of warfare of all (which is why I will never stop playing NTW, as I have RTW & M2TW). A Crimea War / U.S. Civil War (or "War Between the States" as us southern 'rebel scum' call it) would appease both Europeans and U.S. customers. As a military history buff, who thinks the German/Russian Eastern Front conflict was far more interesting than anything done by the U.S. in WWII, I do find the American Civil War (okay, my only ancestor in uniform from then wore blue, he lived in Ohio) a fascinating conflict, one that includes ironclads, submarines and - most importantly - the minie ball which revolutionized warfare in the mid-ninteenth century.

    o i forgot about the mini ball..... and i beleve gatling guns were invented around this time as well (even though i dont think they where used in the civil war but they were used against native tribes)
  • shrspeedbladeshrspeedblade Senior Member Posts: 313Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    Although I think it would be interesting I don't think the US Civil War would work as well for the following reasons:
    (and this is coming from a Civil War history buff, too).

    -The improved range and accuracy of the muskets mean that the combatants stand even further away from each other and it just being a shooting match

    -making the bayonet nearly obsolete, hardly any melee

    -and cavalry far less effective, they had practically abandoned melee and were using repeating carbines by the end of the war

    -only two combatants unless you really wanted revisionist history with Britain intervening for the South or Mexico taking advantage and invading

    If they made it I'd still buy it and play it! But I don't think it would work as well. Fight a NTW battle with only 125 range lights and cav using only carbines and you'd be close.
    <---- That's how I look after all the NTW I've played!
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Posts: 6,827Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    I too find the 18th century/Napoleonic/Roman Empire time frames far more interesting than the American Civil War. However there are many Civil War buffs in the U.S. A TW game would be bought by many who have never played a TW game in addition to those of us already hooked. It would be a way for CA to make money .. not sure if they're interested in that though (ahem).
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • chronicochronico Senior Member Posts: 155Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    ranknfile wrote: »
    I too find the 18th century/Napoleonic/Roman Empire time frames far more interesting than the American Civil War. However there are many Civil War buffs in the U.S. A TW game would be bought by many who have never played a TW game in addition to those of us already hooked. It would be a way for CA to make money .. not sure if they're interested in that though (ahem).
    That was what I was getting at but I did not even word it right. I don't think anyone besides America and a few total war fanatics from around the world would buy the game and would most cost more to make then they would make.
  • JokerJoker Senior Member Posts: 644Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    Wouldn't mind seing an 'ACW' expansion either :)
    My top five of next Total War installments:
    1) TW: Rome II
    2) TW: China
    3) TW: Lord of the Rings
    4) TW: Victorian
    5) TW: Star Wars
    [PORTABLE-ID]joker[/PORTABLE-ID]
  • caspercasper Junior Member Posts: 3Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    yes i realy like this game but the trade circels in the big campaign would be way beter if it was like it is in empire also the 3 campaigns like in empire would be great !! but maybe afrika in sted of india (or i would like south amerika )
    p.s srry for my writing mistakes i am from belgium :d
  • LordMarsLordMars Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    I like the US civil war and it would be nice to have an American Civil War Total War, there are other things higher on my wish list, I also take offence at the whole Europeans don't care about the American Civil War, I think you will find that many who like history do
    Until the late 20th Century American military history was not particualry impressive in comparrison to Europe/Asia, as for an ACWTW I dont think that CA would do it well, and since ETW/NTW was the time to do it as an expansion (don't think theres enough content to do it as a stand alone) I don't think it will be done, I hope for a 'Victorian' total war and see it in that
    Aut vincere aut mori - Either conquer or die
  • Rex ImperatorRex Imperator Junior Member Posts: 26Registered Users
    edited January 2011

    -only two combatants unless you really wanted revisionist history with Britain intervening for the South or Mexico taking advantage and invading


    The French-Mexican War was going at the same time so the Mexicans would not be invading from the South, you could however include the French and Mexicans to add factions.
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Posts: 6,827Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    There were numerous conflicts in the mid-ninteenth century, with the Crimean War, American Civil war and Franco-Prussian War immediately coming to mind. Quite a few conflicts with minie-ball firing muskets and muzzel loading cannon; with techinical improvements such as breech loading firearms and artillery coming about during the period. A game with several of these should have appeal for fans of the series. Probably won't happen though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1800%E2%80%931899
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • RumpullpusRumpullpus Senior Member Posts: 1,216Registered Users
    edited January 2011
    ranknfile wrote: »
    There were numerous conflicts in the mid-ninteenth century, with the Crimean War, American Civil war and Franco-Prussian War immediately coming to mind. Quite a few conflicts with minie-ball firing muskets and muzzel loading cannon; with techinical improvements such as breech loading firearms and artillery coming about during the period. A game with several of these should have appeal for fans of the series. Probably won't happen though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1800%E2%80%931899

    would be really cool if they could do an empire thing where they have all thoses wars going on at once. i dont know much about the crimean war or the franco-prussian war.

    american civil war deserves to be atlest an expansion. to say that nobody isnt interested isnt right or fair as i know there would be enough sales in america alone to justify it. we dont have alot of civil war games.

    i encourage people to read the civil war wiki in the link above, lots of good interesting info.
  • UltimateWarriorUltimateWarrior Junior Member Posts: 29Registered Users
    edited May 2011
    chronico wrote: »
    Tho I would like to see a civil war total war truth is the only fanbase that they would actually make any money of is the American fan base, I can't really see Europeans really caring for anything that happened in America at that time and beyond tbh.
    Hey, I'm Belgian and I do care about America.
    I'm Dutch, but I think and write notes for myself in English, I'm planning to go to the U.S. and I'm fascinated about American History.
    And I'm still European.
    Cowards die many times before their actual death. - Julius Caesar

    I love the name of honor, more than I fear death - Julius Caesar

    Which death is preferably to every other? "The unexpected". - Julius Caesar

    Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. - Napoleon Bonaparte
  • UltimateWarriorUltimateWarrior Junior Member Posts: 29Registered Users
    edited May 2011
    casper wrote: »
    yes i realy like this game but the trade circels in the big campaign would be way beter if it was like it is in empire also the 3 campaigns like in empire would be great !! but maybe afrika in sted of india (or i would like south amerika )
    p.s srry for my writing mistakes i am from belgium :d
    I'm Belgian to, do I make mistakes?
    But it's okay :)
    I speak English since my 9 years old, actually I find English easier than Dutch
    Cowards die many times before their actual death. - Julius Caesar

    I love the name of honor, more than I fear death - Julius Caesar

    Which death is preferably to every other? "The unexpected". - Julius Caesar

    Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. - Napoleon Bonaparte
  • LSDLSD Senior Member Posts: 861Registered Users
    edited May 2011
    Yea, we can play the "trade" game, where the entire campaign is spent trading with France. (You can't say dam-n?) that sounds like fun.
    Seriously, the US had nothing to do with the Napoleonic wars besides trading with France.
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=343158
    ^ Perhaps the most amazing thread i've ever seen, if only because of the huge influx of US players crying their eyes out. A must see.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • ColfaxColfax Senior Member Posts: 967Registered Users
    edited May 2011
    LSD wrote: »
    Yea, we can play the "trade" game, where the entire campaign is spent trading with France. (You can't say dam-n?) that sounds like fun.
    Seriously, the US had nothing to do with the Napoleonic wars besides trading with France.
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=343158
    ^ Perhaps the most amazing thread i've ever seen, if only because of the huge influx of US players crying their eyes out. A must see.

    Why bring this up now? However, it would be nice to see a War of 1812 expansion. Which would involve England, America and Canda plus indian tribes.
    Vinum bonum sapere. Nunc est bibendum. Italia patria populi Romani et aliorum populorum est.
  • LSDLSD Senior Member Posts: 861Registered Users
    edited May 2011
    Colfax wrote: »
    Why bring this up now? However, it would be nice to see a War of 1812 expansion. Which would involve England, America and Canda plus indian tribes.

    You mean why resurrect the dead thread? Wasn't me who necro'd it.
    [portable-ID]lsd[/portable-ID]
    Feel free to check out my Steam guide on naval combat in E:TW
  • King MakerKing Maker Member Posts: 83Registered Users
    edited August 2011
    I think an ACW period isnt out of the realm of possibilities, seems CA has been gearing us up for it. Each new game and expansion seems to be smaller....smaller campaign maps etc. Which you would need if you were doing ACW. Also TWS2 is only ONE faction in my opinion JAPAN...I think the big , including every country in Europe games are behind CA... until....they do TW WW1......if you can ever find the post, and i think it came before ETW, someone at CA posted in the forums that ETW was the new game... blah blah blah...muskets, bayonettes etc...then he said....."many of the creators here at CA have little toy tanks on their desks that they play with, we cant keep them at bay forever"......Although not many tanks were used in WW1 i do believe CA will make this game.


    "Those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the Tiger, ended up inside" JFK


    Disclaimer: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of The Creative Assembly or Sega
  • ThunderduckThunderduck Junior Member Posts: 1Registered Users
    edited August 2011
    chronico wrote: »
    Tho I would like to see a civil war total war truth is the only fanbase that they would actually make any money of is the American fan base, I can't really see Europeans really caring for anything that happened in America at that time and beyond tbh.
    As a European I would love to see an American Civil war game. Although there might be only two sides, the scope is massive and it's the war on the cusp of modern (ish) warfare.
  • hjleedmahjleedma Junior Member Posts: 4Registered Users
    edited September 2011
    Yes, United States cannot be part of Napoleon Total War because US was too weak to play the kind of land force
    in Europe of 1800. Altough US Navy was fast and deadly, it never got big ships in the kind of Victory or Le Redoutable. If the US was coming in the scene England will never let the troups to be send out in force like in WW2 to play a role in Europe. Even during WW1 the US will not play a role until the end and still if the war lasted only longer than few years it will have bankcrupt the country.

    I do agree for the Civil War with Each state a seperate region like the germany state with different alliance and mid state with option to choose the North or South and have Virginia cut to several side. Can also have the eastern campaign with more detail map and the western side map with objective around taking key cities like Vicksburg and New Orleans. The trade ships can be built to get money to different trade and the North will try to cut off trade while the South can built Armored Ships to sink Northern blocade ships. Technologie will be on new kind of rifles and new troups with repeating rifles like the spencers and the henry (civil war winchesters). The North will have the industry but if the South can send some armies and take either Ohio or Illinois and cut off the North they can take over the land. The objectives will be to improve your country prestige so that you will be acknowledged by European countries about your status... that will be fun. The South can also have alliance with Indians and Mexico to take upon the North and give away California and arizona to win the battle...
  • JEPVAJEPVA Member Posts: 40Registered Users
    edited September 2011
    Nemo wrote: »
    I said it many times before - I will fully support American expansion pack for Napoleon if and only if they include the option of burning down Washington. Preferably battle map(s) with White House, Capitol and the rest of famous landmarks where you can shell and burn them. Maybe even recreate the "rockets red glare"? ^^

    P.S. I know "rockets red glare" was connected to bombing of a fort, not burning Washington.

    Be careful for what you wish - the game would then have to recreate the hurricane and tornado that hit the British troops upon their withdrawal from Washington the following day- and put out the fires to boot! Rather providential, wouldn't you say? Beware the ethereal ally!
  • MachofishMachofish Member Posts: 49Registered Users
    edited May 2012
    JEPVA wrote: »
    Be careful for what you wish - the game would then have to recreate the hurricane and tornado that hit the British troops upon their withdrawal from Washington the following day- and put out the fires to boot! Rather providential, wouldn't you say? Beware the ethereal ally!

    Alright, I'm going to raise this thread once more from the dead before a moderator finally comes and drives last nail into the proverbial coffin of the thread.
    The war of 1812, by the views of both Americans and Canadians, was arguably the most pointless, poorly-commanded war (by both sides) that occurred between us. The Americans say they won because us Canadians realized how incapable Britain was of defending us, and demanded our independence as to raise our own standing army. We Canadians say we won because the Americans were technically the aggressors in the war, and despite all their efforts, gained no ground.

    To show just how much of a tie game the War of 1812 was, the Americans stormed York (modern day Toronto) and burned the Canadian parliament buildings to the ground. The new nerve centre of Canada was re-located to Ottawa, which, despite its strategic location, was an absolute rust-bucket slum of a city at the time. In response the British sent a division of the Peninsular Army, which razed and pillaged quite a lot of American territory, including Washington. Result: Tie Game

    Earlier in the war, the aggresions started with the American General Hull, who is depicted in Canadian history books to be a completely incompetent, xenophobic moron of a general. Hull predicted the war as being "A mere matter of marching". It very well may have been that easy for Hull, if he hadn't told his troops to burn and pillage the first few cities who indifferently allowed the Americans entry. General Hull later surrendered at the siege of Detroit, when a vastly inferior force of Canadian militia and Native Americans set up shop outside of the walls, and scared him into giving up the fort without a pitched battle. Of course the events after this would not be kind to us Canadians, General Brock, the mastermind of the "Detroit Bluff", was shot leading a charge at the battle of Queenston heights, where the Canadian armies managed to only barely weather out the storm of the American assault. The Aboriginal Chief Tecumseh, who had assisted Brock in several battles earlier, found his Aboriginal coalition surrounded; abandoned by their allies, and severely out-gunned and out numbered, the Aboriginal Coalition was butchered by the advancing Americans. Result: Tie Game

    All in all, the War of 1812 wasn't so much a "War" in the scope of the TW series, but merely a series of military fiascoes and mishaps.
  • YoutorgYoutorg Banned Posts: 4Banned Users
    edited May 2012
    Very good idea in my opinion :cool:. Napoleon: Total War is the best strategy game !
  • Tyer032392Tyer032392 Senior Member FloridaPosts: 4,609Registered Users
    edited May 2012
    Machofish wrote: »
    Alright, I'm going to raise this thread once more from the dead before a moderator finally comes and drives last nail into the proverbial coffin of the thread.
    The war of 1812, by the views of both Americans and Canadians, was arguably the most pointless, poorly-commanded war (by both sides) that occurred between us. The Americans say they won because us Canadians realized how incapable Britain was of defending us, and demanded our independence as to raise our own standing army. We Canadians say we won because the Americans were technically the aggressors in the war, and despite all their efforts, gained no ground.

    To show just how much of a tie game the War of 1812 was, the Americans stormed York (modern day Toronto) and burned the Canadian parliament buildings to the ground. The new nerve centre of Canada was re-located to Ottawa, which, despite its strategic location, was an absolute rust-bucket slum of a city at the time. In response the British sent a division of the Peninsular Army, which razed and pillaged quite a lot of American territory, including Washington. Result: Tie Game

    Earlier in the war, the aggresions started with the American General Hull, who is depicted in Canadian history books to be a completely incompetent, xenophobic moron of a general. Hull predicted the war as being "A mere matter of marching". It very well may have been that easy for Hull, if he hadn't told his troops to burn and pillage the first few cities who indifferently allowed the Americans entry. General Hull later surrendered at the siege of Detroit, when a vastly inferior force of Canadian militia and Native Americans set up shop outside of the walls, and scared him into giving up the fort without a pitched battle. Of course the events after this would not be kind to us Canadians, General Brock, the mastermind of the "Detroit Bluff", was shot leading a charge at the battle of Queenston heights, where the Canadian armies managed to only barely weather out the storm of the American assault. The Aboriginal Chief Tecumseh, who had assisted Brock in several battles earlier, found his Aboriginal coalition surrounded; abandoned by their allies, and severely out-gunned and out numbered, the Aboriginal Coalition was butchered by the advancing Americans. Result: Tie Game

    All in all, the War of 1812 wasn't so much a "War" in the scope of the TW series, but merely a series of military fiascoes and mishaps.

    One of the main problems about that war which many historians agree on is that communications were very limited at that time. During the years of that war, it would take an average of three to five months for a letter to traverse the Atlantic Ocean which is partially to blame for the war. As anyone who studies history knows, is that during the Napoleonic wars, Great Britain was seizing sailors from the American Merchant marine and conscripting them into the Royal Navy. Though what history never talks about is that three weeks before the outbreak of war, the U.K ceased conscripting sailors for its navy and by the time the U.S learned of their actions t ease the tensions, it was already to late, the U.K and U.S were at war.

    Though, even though the U.S Army wasn't very successful, the Navy had much more success than their Army counterparts, which is largely do to the new frigates that were being built in the U.S which had wood that was as strong as Iron, which is most notiable in the USS Constitution where the 32pounder carronade cannon shells would harmlessly bounce off of its hull.
    "All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. "
  • WoodhornWoodhorn Junior Member Posts: 18Registered Users
    edited May 2015
    this is awesome

    and that is true by the way.
  • Billy RuffianBilly Ruffian Moderator UKPosts: 27,810Registered Users, Moderators
    edited May 2015
    Closed to prevent further necro-posting.

    "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
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.