Who Thinks the USA will/should be Playable in N:TW?

[Society]

I dont see why, since it didnt do anything majorly important to Napoleon.
But im sure it will be

They kept the brits busy in the war of 1812 After peace in 1815 some of the units who fought in the war of 1812 actually went over and fought in waterloo. What if those units got wiped out in the Americas? What if the US didn't accept a peace treaty and fought on, and those units never got a chance to fight in waterloo?


Just because the US didn't directly interact with france doesn't mean they weren't important to how things ultimately played out. There was a rather major war going on in the US, even if it wasn't the focus of world history at the time (ol boney sorta hogged the spotlight, you know?)

[Nordmann]

I find it odd that American consumers require an American themed product in the first place, surely you realise that history does not revolve around you? I have many games that do not include my own country (England), and knowing this I still purchased and played them. Why? Because I have a keen interest in history, which neither asks for, nor requires my own nation's presence to be satisfied.

As yet CA have released little in the way of information regarding where the campaign(s) will take place, if they decide to focus on the European theatre, which is highly likely given it's centre stage placement in the Napoleonic era, then I cannot see the U.S being given more than a token mention. It is entirely possible they will include the U.S in a RTI style War of 1812 campaign, but until we know more, it is pointless to speculate.

I will however mention that sales of ETW, despite the minimal feature of the U.S, were obviously good enough for the development of a sequel. Thus, it seems to me that either U.S consumers purchased the product regardless, or there were vast sales made in Europe, which offest the lack of American interest. If anyone has some hard figures regarding this, I would be interested in seeing them.

[johncage]

not arguing your point about americans wanting to be represented in every game, but the us wasn't minimally featured in etw. in fact, they were a huge part of it.

[apecallum]

I don't begrudge the Europeans in having a game of their own. But that is what I think it is, a game targeted specifically at a European audience. And yes I am sure it will probably include England, considering that Creative Assembly is an English company. But I will say that I resent the notion from those who say that the United States wasn't a relevant force in world affairs of the period, considering the whooping we handed down to the British, French and anybody else who got in our way during the 18th and 19th centuries.

I was able to overlook the fact that the United States isn't playable in the Empire Total War Grand Campaign, without a mod, although I consider this the result of an underlying contempt the British harbor for the U.S. But they did such an exceptional job on the game that I forgave them. I suspect that they only added the Road to Independence to make it more marketable to an American audience, and wouldn't be surprised if it was included against the wishes of a majority of the developers. This time around we are being completely ignored. I don't think its going to sell in the U.S. based on the theme of Napoleonic warfare, its a very narrow audience, but as a European game it might do fine.

What whooping exactly are you referring to? Maybe the American War of Independence? The same "whooping" that was decided by the intervention of France and Spain? The same whooping which cost the United States twice as many casualties as the British contingent suffered in the same conflict? Or the war of 1812 perhaps? OH yes what a fine example of superior American war waging prowess. Two significant American victories (one occurring after the conflict had been resolved) in the entire war and again unarguably more American casualties than the British. You got beaten by an Army heavily involved in the largest conflict to occur for 60 years, thousands of miles away might I add, and a bunch of bearded Canadian Militia more versed in goat milking than musket loading. Boy you sure showed the world a thing or two. Idiot.

[johncage]

word of advice, don't argue about the us' warring abilities, there's no way you'll win.

[Ahmed IV]

I believe it will not, and shouldn't be included in NTW because Napoleon didn't have anything major going on with the US. If the US should be included just because the Louisian purchase or such...then lots of factions should be included like Haii for example. Napoleon failed in capturing Haiti.

[Nordmann]

not arguing your point about americans wanting to be represented in every game, but the us wasn't minimally featured in etw. in fact, they were a huge part of it.

I must have missed that, while I was crushing native Americans, and the odd emergent U.S!

word of advice, don't argue about the us' warring abilities, there's no way you'll win.

The U.S has it's strengths, but no one is invincible. Step out of your nationalism for just a moment, and you might learn something.

[apecallum]

word of advice, don't argue about the us' warring abilities, there's no way you'll win.

And why is that? America has only either out lucked or out produced its enemies to attain it's victories. Either that or it has simply been in a vastly more fortunate position than it's opponent.

[MehemtAli_Pasha]

does any body here consider having North America present, while the US being just a minor faction???

Edit: it would work best for all..right?

[Sol Invictus]

Let's try not to see who can piss the furthest. We are all friends and allies and share so much in common. I am always happy to have our allies by the side of the United States when the bullets start to fly.

[General Cornwallis]

apecallum is right, I am a Canadian and even I will say with all the odds, the USA was in more of a position to win, I mean the British did not have an overly large garrison here, the American's had a army who could have just over ran us, but we had Brock! and the American training during the war was horrible, I mean the American victories at Chippawa, and New Orleans were not overly impressive. At Chippewa we were outnumbered, and the Americans could not follow the retreat because of British six-pound cannons. And New Orleans, the Americans hid behind a wall, whup di doo....

Nonetheless I believe it has value to the game, you can tie up Britain, or Britian can use them for there own benfit, and plus I can't lie and say seeing some Candian militia wouldn't make me enjoy the game a bit more.

[Sol Invictus]

apecallum is right, I am a Canadian and even I will say with all the odds, the USA was in more of a position to win, I mean the British did not have an overly large garrison here, the American's had a army who could have just over ran us, but we had Brock! and the American training during the war was horrible, I mean the American victories at Chippawa, and New Orleans were not overly impressive. At Chippewa we were outnumbered, and the Americans could not follow the retreat because of British six-pound cannons. And New Orleans, the Americans hid behind a wall, whup di doo....

Nonetheless I believe it has value to the game, you can tie up Britain, or Britian can use them for there own benfit, and plus I can't lie and say seeing some Candian militia wouldn't make me enjoy the game a bit more.

To be fair, the American Army during the War of 1812 was tiny and fleshed out with barely trained militia.
Are you saying that Jackson should have positioned his men on the open ground? I guess Wellington should not have hid behind the walls of Hougemont and La Haye Sainte. Don't be silly.

[General Cornwallis]

I didn't mean it like that, I just meant it was not a great victory to go in the history books, if they had fought it out line to line, well then yes it would have been a great American Victory, but they fought the entire engagement behind a wall, did the British make a mistake to attack without the proper supplies, like ladders, yes they did, but it was not a great battle, by a Napoleonic standpoint. And it is completely different than Waterloo, the entire British/allied army wasn't garrisoned in hougoment and La Haye Sainte, the KGL and Guards were, very small contingents of the army, so you can't really compare the two. The American army of the War of 1812 was yes mostly militia, but there were trained Regular regiments, and General Scott did drill his army like those of the French during the Revolution, and the size still could have overwhelmed Canada, plus the Canadian militia was mostly farmers, and city folk, whom never had fired a gun in their life. The odds were more towards the U.S. until the British sent more troops, and Brock was a higher caliber genreal than any the U.S. had at the time.

[Sol Invictus]

Well I'm not going to champion American military competence during the War of 1812. It was one of the most pointless and unnecessary wars we have ever fought. The Navy did a fine job though.

[General Cornwallis]

Agreed haha, yes the Navy did mamage to score a couple blows on British Frigates.

[Darkpriest667]

You obviously have a deep passion to play America in NTW and I can certainly understand and sympathize with that. If CA can include them without taking away from the main show I will be all for it. I assume that CA will find some way to include them in order to help sales in N. America.

no i could really care less about playing it as i wont be buying it.. I want my ETW fixed before i buy a single other game... especially one from Crappy err Creative assembly.... No.. I am purely in it for the historical significance of the united states during the napoleonic wars. Without the US Britain becomes a much greater threat to Napoleon...

[André Masséna]

The French army has a biggest impact in the final of WW2 than the American army during all the Napoleonic wars but it doesn't present in all (American) WW2 games.

and? Because those games suck, make this one suck too?

[Valerius Tiberius]

I think NTW should be concentrated more on Europa for this.
CA also said there would be a lot more towns and all, so I think they will be using the ones of America and India to put in Europa.
After all, the USA didn't play a big role in Napoleon's campaign, so why would they have to be in?
(or did they? don't you shoot me you Napoleon fanatics )

[Kinjo]

The Creative Assembly's Kieron Bridgen assures us that the latest Total War is more about the era, rather than the man.

-GameSpot

Seeing that most of the members posting in this thread probably hail from a European Country the answer is obvious. If countries such as Denmark, and Sweden are going to be playable hypothetically then I see no reason why the US should not be a be playable faction. This is the era where the US defines and establishes itself as a nation although they should be rather weak with a small army and a very small navy.

[EmperorBatman999]

not arguing your point about americans wanting to be represented in every game, but the us wasn't minimally featured in etw. in fact, they were a huge part of it.

And that is why we expect we expect to be in NTW.
Comew on, pretty please CA, I jkust want to play as the USA in NTW more with these damn self-centered Brits and Euros saying "The USA and the Louisana purchase wasnt important!", think about, the War of 1812 had to divert British forces from Europe, and like a post above said, if we didn't allow for peace, then Waterloo wouldn't have as many regments, and that means Napoleon could've won.