World war II Total war

[Szlachta]

It would either by recognizable as a Total War game or recognizable as World War 2, but not both.

Total War battles have always been smaller in scale than the real world counterparts, but there's not usually more than a single zero (two for the gunpowder era games) different between Total War armies and the real historical deal. War World 1 and 2 saw battles involving hundreds of thousands of soldiers, fighting over areas about the size of a typical Total War province, for months. Then add concepts like strategic bombing, naval battles carried out over vast areas of ocean thanks to aircraft carriers and ships packing weapons with ranges measured in miles.

Even allowing for typical Total War downscaling, you're looking at a game which is closer to the more abstract strategy games like those of Paradox or the Civ series than the turned based/rts hybrid the TW series is known for.

...It would be recognizable as a modern TW game... Its already been posted many time how this would work. Just because your not imaginative and creative enough to figure how, doesn't mean others aren't either. LOL at the afraid of change crowd. The scaling wouldn't be any worse than it has been in the past. Especially since TW has always been a representation anyway, not a 1:1 scale ever. Just more people wanting the same rehash. Weird since you'd figure fan boys would want a TW in every Era. A TW for everything. Guess your just not a real fan of the series.

[KaiserJoe]

Hell no, and no it's not because portraying Nazi Germany is scary. They're the nation I always end up playing, I do so love the Wehrmacht.

But exactly like your point, think of Operation Barbarossa....with 2 stacks of 20 units. Maybe 8,000 units combined, whereas there were millions of men that fought.
They can't portray WW2 correctly, they shouldn't do it. They couldn't even do WW1 unless they're hiding some way of putting thousands more troops on screen with no performance drop and willing to make an AI that could actually fight with those units correctly.

It'd be a big mistake, for right now at least.

[Szlachta]

Hell no, and no it's not because portraying Nazi Germany is scary. They're the nation I always end up playing, I do so love the Wehrmacht.

But exactly like your point, think of Operation Barbarossa....with 2 stacks of 20 units. Maybe 8,000 units combined, whereas there were millions of men that fought.
They can't portray WW2 correctly, they shouldn't do it. They couldn't even do WW1 unless they're hiding some way of putting thousands more troops on screen with no performance drop and willing to make an AI that could actually fight with those units correctly.

It'd be a big mistake, for right now at least.

Yes, they could do it, lol at the unimaginative.

[DeliCiousTZM]

There are so many avenues so many generals so many factions. Africa italy malta ? spain Vichy France omg FINLAND RUMANIA UKRAINE wtf omg poland guys this is awesome. There is no eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenddddddddd to the possbilities!.


i see how this is a huge project to undertake and i see how people might say its to early but hey lets have WW2 Total war before we have WW2 Total war 2. All can happen in the future but untill that i can settle for 8000 soldiers you zoom into the battlefield its not like they show the complete line anway.

[Szlachta]

There are so many avenues so many generals so many factions. Africa italy malta ? spain Vichy France omg FINLAND RUMANIA UKRAINE wtf omg poland guys this is awesome. There is no eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenddddddddd to the possbilities!.

A lot would be minor, unplayable factions, or not present at all, like Liechtenstein. Similar to how Empire TW did it.

[Tim_Ward]

LOL at the afraid of change crowd.

Actually, I said I would only be prepared to play TW:WW2 if the game was different enough from the current style of TW games to do justice to World War 2. That actually makes me the exact opposite of 'afraid of change'. I am literally demanding change or I wouldn't play this hypothetical game.

Do try to keep up.

The scaling wouldn't be any worse than it has been in the past.

Please describe the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Midway as played in an engine similar to the current Total War engine. You can downscale the numbers and the area involved, but it has to the true to the spirit of how it occurred in real life.

Explain how you would represent strategic bombing the Battle of the Atlantic.

[Szlachta]

Actually, I said I would only be prepared to play TW:WW2 if the game was different enough from the current style of TW games to do justice to World War 2. That actually makes me the exact opposite of 'afraid of change'. I am literally demanding change or I wouldn't play this hypothetical game.

Do try to keep up.



Please describe the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Midway as played in an engine similar to the current Total War engine. You can downscale the numbers and the area involved, but it has to the true to the spirit of how it occurred in real life.

Explain how you would represent strategic bombing the Battle of the Atlantic.

Please Describe the Battle of Troy in Rome TW, or any battle that had thousands upon thousands of men, when TW only allowed like 5,000. And I don't see how continually sending Bombers to strike things would be hard either. IT takes like 5 seconds of thinking to solve these 'problems' people think a modern TW would have. Would it be the most ambitious and probably the buggiest TW game, sure, and it wouldn't be the next TW game either, but it will still work, and will still be a TW game. Not to mention in a future game, there would be larger maps, more units, etc. It would still be a representation, like every TW game ever made.

[Tim_Ward]

Just cut the numbers by a third but otherwise make it exactly the same?

And I don't see how continually sending Bombers to strike things would be hard either

No, but working out how you're going to simulate interception is going to be kinda hard, isn't it? First of all, if this is going to be proper Total War, then there has to be a tactical combat mode. So that mean, you've gotta do air tactical combat. Which is 3 Dimensional by the way, so you'll need a whole new interface too.

Now think about the turn length. A Lancaster bomber could get to Berlin from an air field in England within a few hours - at any point in it's journey it could be intercepted by German fighters. If the allies have territory in France at this point in the game, they might decide to send their own fighters to intercept the interceptors and so on. So basically, you could have this battle taking places all over Northern Europe every night. I guess the most realistic turn length would be like a week or something, so how do you move your pieces around a map to represent these battles taking places in a time frame of hours when every turn is a week?

IT takes like 5 seconds of thinking to solve these 'problems' people think a modern TW would have.

It takes five seconds thinking if you want to do some crap Civ-esque thing for everything. It takes a bit longer to solve them in a Total War style, and do it well.

[Sir Winston Churchill]

I really hate when people try to provide CA even more ridiculous ideas to waste time on. Total War AI can't even handle lining up and shooting at each other completely, why the hell would you want to incorporate squad-based combat with multiple kinds of fire being used (rifles, SMGs, LMGs, shotguns, etc.) not including the multiple types of vehicles (tanks, planes, capital ships, jeeps, artillery, etc.) that would have to be in use, ignoring the multiple kinds of battlefields (ex. beach landings) and its features (trenches, bunkers, fox holes, barbed wire, tank traps, mines, etc.), and a plethora of other things that would have to be used to make a decent WWII-based game?

Not to mention variety isn't exactly CA's thing these days. There was a lot of variety in WWII. The entire WORLD was involved, which would require a WORLD map, and I can only imagine the ridiculous scenarios that would happen. No, N-O, no. The WWII idea has always been to me the most retarded suggestion that could have been made to the CA team, since they can't even handle 18th century warfare. To even attempt to make a DECENT WWII: Total War game would require much more than the "let's things out in a year" policy they've adopted.

[Szlachta]

Just cut the numbers by a third but otherwise make it exactly the same?

Well, Ancient, Medieval, and Renaissance sieges could last months, if not a year, or longer. In every TW they last 60 minutes at most...

[IGdood]

I'll take WW1 before WW2

[Felixlynch777]

Everyone that said no are kidding themselves, they'd buy the next Total War game if it was Total War: My Little Pony Edition

[DeliCiousTZM]

Actually, I said I would only be prepared to play TW:WW2 if the game was different enough from the current style of TW games to do justice to World War 2. That actually makes me the exact opposite of 'afraid of change'. I am literally demanding change or I wouldn't play this hypothetical game.

Do try to keep up.



Please describe the Battle of Kursk or the Battle of Midway as played in an engine similar to the current Total War engine. You can downscale the numbers and the area involved, but it has to the true to the spirit of how it occurred in real life.

Explain how you would represent strategic bombing the Battle of the Atlantic.

You are right it would be a diffrent kind of total war game one adapted for Modern wars. But still maintain a similiar total war campaign map with diplomacy economy "Industry" on the battlefield it would play like a total war game in the sense of scope if possible...... Merge the campaign map with the battle map :O

[Szlachta]

I really hate when people try to provide CA even more ridiculous ideas to waste time on. Total War AI can't even handle lining up and shooting at each other completely, why the hell would you want to incorporate squad-based combat with multiple kinds of fire being used (rifles, SMGs, LMGs, shotguns, etc.) not including the multiple types of vehicles (tanks, planes, capital ships, jeeps, artillery, etc.) that would have to be in use, ignoring the multiple kinds of battlefields (ex. beach landings) and its features (trenches, bunkers, fox holes, barbed wire, tank traps, mines, etc.), and a plethora of other things that would have to be used to make a decent WWII-based game?

Not to mention variety isn't exactly CA's thing these days. There was a lot of variety in WWII. The entire WORLD was involved, which would require a WORLD map, and I can only imagine the ridiculous scenarios that would happen. No, N-O, no. The WWII idea has always been to me the most retarded suggestion that could have been made to the CA team, since they can't even handle 18th century warfare. To even attempt to make a DECENT WWII: Total War game would require much more than the "let's things out in a year" policy they've adopted.

...Going by AI as the standard, CA has never made a decent game.

[The Holy Pilgrim]

Everyone that said no are kidding themselves, they'd buy the next Total War game if it was Total War: My Little Pony Edition

You say that like that's a bad thing

[BullGod]

Play Combat Mission if you want WW2. Or Close Combat. Great games. There is a lot of games set in WW2 period. I don't think TW needs to go that way and get lost there.

And you, Szlachta are sooo "lol-imaginative" unlike the rest of us, that all you want is yet another mind-blowing, innovative WW2 game. I salute your imagination.

[Sir Winston Churchill]

...Going by AI as the standard, CA has never made a decent game.

No, they made decent games when they made games who mechanics were simple enough for the AI to put to use. It's not that hard of an idea to think "Oh, I have bowmen, keep them safe and use them to whittle the enemy. I have some axeman, have then hit their sides while the troops hold the line." as in Medieval II, etc.

But using TW's AI on WWII is like asking a toddler to manage an investment corporation.

[Felixlynch777]

You say that like that's a bad thing

It would be completely amazing, especially if they had the same blood pack thing. The bronies would cry XD

[Ferdiad]

God no.

[CptAustus]

Everyone that said no are kidding themselves, they'd buy the next Total War game if it was Total War: My Little Pony Edition

I bought Dinossaur: Total War!