I am more excited for Fall of the Samurai than for any Total War title ever, because it hits upon a theme that Total War games have always done well: the advancing of technology and the clash of cultures. Plus the technologies set to be portrayed (Gatling guns, ironclads, railroads, rifles) is just the cat's meow.
That of course gets me thinking...with all these new systems being implemented in a Total War game, where are they planning to go next? I have always hoped for a Victoria: Total War game, with a time frame of [roughly] 1848-1914. Now, to me anyway, this looks like it may actually happen.
What do you think?
Personally, I'd like to see Rome get a facelift.
^As would most of the community, I think. But with the Victorian era items being added to Shogun, I don't see it going that way...even though Total War is great at doing melee, cold steel combat. I get the vibe they are going to go for the other end of the spectrum. Like dreadnaughts.
Why are you talking about a PC game in the board game section?
But I'm with JH on this one. I want Rome 2 with some serious attention put into a Ancient Greece expansion Alexander, Sparta and the Peloponnesian war.
Er... wrong forum? Or is there a TW tabletop game I don't know about? ;)
I think I like JH's idea - a facelift to Rome. Or maybe TW - World War I.
My bad, was a mistake. Because I get all giggity when discussing new games. I'll try to move it.
Quote from: Bison on February 01, 2012, 02:05:17 PM
But I'm with JH on this one. I want Rome 2 with some serious attention put into a Ancient Greece expansion Alexander, Sparta and the Peloponnesian war.
Actually, I would love to see a TW focuses exclusively on ancient
Hellas -- as the main game, not just an expansion.
That, or ancient China (probably the "Spring and Autumn" period, but I'm not picky).
^We have Hegemony for Greece.
I would love a Romance of the Three Kingdoms Total War, though...or an Asia Total War.
Still like the Victoria: Total War idea bestest right now.
Quote from: Martok on February 01, 2012, 02:20:21 PM
Quote from: Bison on February 01, 2012, 02:05:17 PM
But I'm with JH on this one. I want Rome 2 with some serious attention put into a Ancient Greece expansion Alexander, Sparta and the Peloponnesian war.
Actually, I would love to see a TW focuses exclusively on ancient Hellas -- as the main game, not just an expansion.
That, or ancient China (probably the "Spring and Autumn" period, but I'm not picky).
I think if they focused on the Greek era like they did with Nappy; it'd be a hell of a game. Plus I think the TW battles just work better when it's pixels smashing into each other at melee range with ranged support.
I to would like to see Rome get some more love especially with the new strategic map. I think that would be great for that period.
Quote from: Gusington on February 01, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
^We have Hegemony for Greece.
A specious argument. By that reasoning, there's no point in CA making Rome 2, since Longbow's next Hegemony title is focusing on Caesar. :P
Quote from: Gusington on February 01, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
I would love a Romance of the Three Kingdoms Total War, though...or an Asia Total War.
I'd prefer it focus specifically on China. I still feel CA does their best work when they focus on a smaller area (relatively speaking).
Quote from: Gusington on February 01, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
Still like the Victoria: Total War idea bestest right now.
Ugh. Only if they seriously amp up the strategic portion of the game.
Land battles from the 17th century onward bore me to tears. Naval warfare during that period could be fun, but probably not enough to make up for it IMO.
Quote from: Bison on February 01, 2012, 02:23:05 PM
I think if they focused on the Greek era like they did with Nappy; it'd be a hell of a game. Plus I think the TW battles just work better when it's pixels smashing into each other at melee range with ranged support.
Agreed.
Would also love to see ship combat represented during that era. Just let me ram some Persian ships with my triremes!
I believe Gus was referring to the MTW2 Hegemony mod.
No the Hegemony games from Longbow!
Is this the time to mention that those two games play nothing alike?
Of course it is! I finally bought a copy of Hegemony Gold but haven't jumped in yet. I know peeps here have raved about it.
Quote from: Gusington on February 01, 2012, 03:55:34 PM
Of course it is! I finally bought a copy of Hegemony Gold but haven't jumped in yet. I know peeps here have raved about it.
I liked it. I suspect you will, too.
I really enjoy Hegemony, but TW it is not. And I do not mean this in a bad way.
Quote from: Bison on February 01, 2012, 04:02:21 PM
I really enjoy Hegemony, but TW it is not. And I do not mean this in a bad way.
Agreed.
Quote from: Gusington on February 01, 2012, 01:59:22 PM
I am more excited for Fall of the Samurai than for any Total War title ever, because it hits upon a theme that Total War games have always done well: the advancing of technology and the clash of cultures. Plus the technologies set to be portrayed (Gatling guns, ironclads, railroads, rifles) is just the cat's meow.
Hiten Mitsurugi Style!!!
(Crap, no Kenshin smiley back at Wargamer.)
Yes, I had been hoping the new AGE engine game would be the Meiji Revolution, though that seems unlikely. I am quite happy to "settle" for "only" Meiji Total War. Go forth, you wolves of Mibu!
My vote would be for the American Civil War. I know we have a good battle engine in Gettysburg, but would like to see a strategic layer added on top of a 3d battles engine, plus being able to have what-if battlers.
I'm looking forward to finally firing up Hegemony while reading Kagan's Peloponnesian War.
But right now I am feeling Japanesey...going to start the Rise of the Samurai campaign tonight or tomorrow.
Which leads me back to being very excited for Fall of the Samurai. It's got railroads by criminey! RAILROADS!!
Railroads lead to railguns. Which lead me to soiling my drawers.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2012, 06:47:43 PM
My vote would be for the American Civil War. I know we have a good battle engine in Gettysburg, but would like to see a strategic layer added on top of a 3d battles engine, plus being able to have what-if battlers.
I do not understand the desire for an ACW Total War title, as there would only be two factions. Maybe it would work as part of an expansion?
Good point. But for me I would be fine with only two factions to play it:). I hardly ever play all the different factions that are available anyway.
Whatever game they do next I hope they keep some of the RPGish elements from Shogun and improve on that. I enjoyed customizing generals for particular tasks in my nation. Also I hope they continue to improve on unit experience as I like carrying forward a core group of veterans into battles. It makes it that much worse when you lose one of the units, but it also gives me pause before committing them to something stupid.
Quote from: Martok on February 02, 2012, 01:45:48 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2012, 06:47:43 PM
My vote would be for the American Civil War. I know we have a good battle engine in Gettysburg, but would like to see a strategic layer added on top of a 3d battles engine, plus being able to have what-if battlers.
I do not understand the desire for an ACW Total War title, as there would only be two factions. Maybe it would work as part of an expansion?
That is an excellent point. Perhaps the Seven Years War then?
Quote from: LongBlade on February 02, 2012, 09:11:58 AM
Quote from: Martok on February 02, 2012, 01:45:48 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2012, 06:47:43 PM
My vote would be for the American Civil War. I know we have a good battle engine in Gettysburg, but would like to see a strategic layer added on top of a 3d battles engine, plus being able to have what-if battlers.
I do not understand the desire for an ACW Total War title, as there would only be two factions. Maybe it would work as part of an expansion?
That is an excellent point. Perhaps the Seven Years War then?
Ooh, that could be a hell of a lot of fun.
I still wouldn't care for the land battles (for me, gunpowder weapons = boring), but I could still enjoy it provided the strategic side were robust enough (especially if the rubbish diplomacy of Empire was done away with). Also, I admittedly (and ironically) like the naval warfare of that period, so there's definitely some appeal in that as well.
I still think the next one will be Victoria: Total War. The title has a nice ring to it, there can be 50 factions, players can bitch-slap upstart indigenous populations and tech advancing from 1850-1900 would be da bomb, pun intended. Plus: railroads and railroad guns.
Call me crazy, but I actually wouldn't mind seeing them copy Neocore's King Arthur. I would be really curious to see the CA take on this game; I'm talking the whole fantasy thing. In fact, maybe even a fantasy-based Total War game might be interesting...
I don't think ACW would be a good topic for Total War. Although the combat might be possible, so much of the ACW was diplomatic in nature that I don't think the Total War engine would capture the war's dynamics very well.
^You're crazy.
If they want to be topical they could shoot for Republican Candidate:Total War. CA might have to tone down the realism a bit though or the game will have to be sold from behind the counter in plain brown paper bags...
^Interesting but there are no winners in that game.
Quote from: Toonces on February 02, 2012, 01:51:59 PM
Call me crazy, but I actually wouldn't mind seeing them copy Neocore's King Arthur. I would be really curious to see the CA take on this game; I'm talking the whole fantasy thing. In fact, maybe even a fantasy-based Total War game might be interesting...
+1
I'll jump on that bandwagon. I know it's a break from their brand, but a fantasy title could be a huge win on that engine.
I'll add another vote to the fantasy bandwagon, including my previous comments about the RPGish elements.
I haven't played the Third Age mod, although I have been meaning to, but, that would certainly scratch a TW fantasy itch...wouldn't it?
Quote from: MetalDog on February 02, 2012, 09:45:44 PM
I haven't played the Third Age mod, although I have been meaning to, but, that would certainly scratch a TW fantasy itch...wouldn't it?
Now that you mention it that does as long as you like the Tolkien universe. That is my favorite TW mod. Its been a while since I've played that, I might have to install in on my new computer. Thanks for the reminder.
Personally, fantasy doesn't grab me for a Total War title. The series has always been firmly planted in history. Now having every detail historically correct??? Not saying that at all. I think the mod groups are able to bring 'Fantasy: Total War' to everyone who wants it, like the excellent Middle Earth TW mod.
What I would like to see is either a full title or expansion that includes the ACW!!! That right there would dip my cookie in a big way. At some point, I figure that every war/conflict from Ancients - 1900 will have been covered by the TW folks, in time.
^I totally agree. I like my TW more historically centered. That's not to say that the Third Age mods are not the cat's meow. Because they are. So...I'd still like to see Victoria: Total War. The beez neez, it would be.
Been playing the latest edition of Third Age TW and there are many improvements over the previous 2. It's now among my favorites. Depending on how well FotS turns out, I could see Fall of the Confederacy( maybe with England, France and Mexico as factions), or other Imperial Age campaigns in Africa or Asia. The engine looks perfect for a South American Independence type setting. How about Boer War Total War? THat'd be a big seller.
^I am praying to the gaming gods you are right. Ironclad duels! Airship recon! Killing restless natives! This sells itself really.
The history wars are getting old. :P
How's about Total War: Martian Colonies
Like the factions in Alpha Centuri