New Attila Content in 2017

[Welsh Dragon]

I know right. I was so surprised to read so much hate about it. First, those people upset that there are not enough historical games (I'm one of them). But now those people are upset that CA is trying to sell them expansions of the same game. Expansions were around for a long time and I always loved them. Some people always complain about DLC, they've been around since Empire, so eight years as of now and the world did not end as far as I know.

It is just unfortunate when CA finally trying to create something creative, and based on Jacks words it looks like he is trying to make more detailed and more eventful campaign for us some individuals hate it without even seeing what is all about. The biggest thing that I do not understand that same people complain about length, size and price of the game. It's evident they have not read press release because Jack said it would be as long as any total war game, map as large as Attila (it's huge to me) and prices I think they are looking at Fall of Samurai. To me, it seems like a great value.

The only issue I will have CA if they keep using the old engine and not upgrade to 64bit used in Warhammer.

I think part of it is just different players have different expectations and/or look at things differently.

For some people every new game has to be a revolution with a new engine, every new DLC must break new ground that has never been touched by developer or modder before. For others, we're happy to play games that we enjoy, even if they may be similar to other games we also enjoy, (and same goes for DLC. Some, like me, also just prefer paying for the developers idea of what a faction should be, than playing a modders idea of what they should be for free.)

For some DLC is a dirty word, and no matter how good it is they will feel it is wrong. For others, we take each DLC as it comes, and judge them on their own merit and price.

Then there are some people who will never be happy whatever CA does. And then there's the thankfully very, very small minority who just like causing trouble and may not even really be interested in the game, just in the "fun" they get from winding others up.

Those are just some of the different points of view I've seen across various Total War boards in my many years of playing Total War and being part of the community (either passively as a lurker or actively as, well, Welsh Dragon. ) And each likely has merits (well, except for the causing trouble for troubles sake one,) and those that hold that view likely have good reasons for them to hold those views.

Personally, I've enjoyed every Total War I've played. (Which is everything from Medieval 1 to Rome 2, including all expansions and DLC except Blood & Gore types.* I think CA gets more right than they do wrong, and don't have an issue with DLC as long as both it and the game it is for a reasonably priced for the content. But I respect not everyone feels that way.

(*Unfortunately Attila and Warhammer I have issues with them triggering my light sensitivity and migraines, though still hope to play them some day if I can find a solution.)

I the end, I think Total War: Sagas aren't going to appeal to everyone, much like Warhammer doesn't, or firearms era or the Shogun games etc. But I think that they have the potential to be a lot of fun, to cover specific periods or events that might never make it into a Major Total War release (American Civil War is to me a very good candidate for a Saga game) and also to bridge the gap between Major releases.

I saw a post earlier, can't remember where, that I think described the situation best. To paraphrase.

There are now 3 types of Historical: Total War game.

1. Eras. The Major releases, covering great sweeps of history. Medieval, Empire, Rome.
2. Characters. Standalone games/expansions built off the work done for a Major, but based around a person in a smaller timeframe. Napoleon, Attila.
3. Sagas. Standalone games/expansions built off the work done for a Major, but based around a specific event in a smaller timeframe. Mongol Invasion, Fall of the Samurai

Some will say it's just a rebranding, and in part yes it is. CA staff have even highlighted that a Saga game isn't a new idea, more them putting a name to something they have done in the past. But having clearly defined names for each type of game is I think a good idea, as it will hopefully lead to people having more realistic expectations when it comes to each game, be it Era, Character or Saga.

As for 64 Bit, I get the impression the first Era game will be built off Rome 2/Attila, so probably not 64 bit. But future titles, I'd say there's a reasonable chance, especially moving forward from the next Eras game.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[keona]

Really well said. Sorry to hear about your light sensitivity. I'm using f.lux for past two years and it been a life saver.

I really hope you wrong about the 64bit engine because it would such a great improvement for mid to late game.

[Welsh Dragon]

Really well said. Sorry to hear about your light sensitivity. I'm using f.lux for past two years and it been a life saver.

I really hope you wrong about the 64bit engine because it would such a great improvement for mid to late game.

Thanks. I've made a note of that software, will give it a try sometime.

And I could be wrong, just that's the impression I'm getting.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Anibal at portas]

a game on a exclusive historical epoch is the correct and not a generalist campaign are repetitive,bored,empty of content,with equal units of different factions and a generalist strategic map,many players would have wanted a game on hannibal barca and not in a simple dlc, that would have treated the second punica war with the immersion and historical immensity that deserves.
interesting historical campaign for a total war game can be of different epoch,the united states civil war,the zulu wars,the english civil war,alexander campaing in the east against the persian empire and the expedition to india and many more campaigns and historical moments that CA should take in games.
games with historical units, historical generals, historical events and everything that gives the game immersion, depth and historical realism,that we have been waiting for a long time, many players that CA do this,If this is so, congratulations.

[keona]

I'm excited about Saga games for the same reasons. I wish we will have Saga games full of detail, hopefully, games with smaller time scale will let us build palisades and walls.

[keona]

Based on that FAQ Sagas will not have any main historical figures like Atilla or Napoleon. So I'm guessing it is not going to be about King Arthur, Alexander the Great, Spartacus, Gen. Barca, etc. She said it will more like Boshin War not focused on one character. This should be interesting and refreshing. I wonder what kind of conflict they chose that does not involve great leader that is remembered by the historians.

[FrozenmenSS]

Based on that FAQ Sagas will not have any main historical figures like Atilla or Napoleon. So I'm guessing it is not going to be about King Arthur, Alexander the Great, Spartacus, Gen. Barca, etc. She said it will more like Boshin War not focused on one character. This should be interesting and refreshing. I wonder what kind of conflict they chose that does not involve great leader that is remembered by the historians.

Ok lets count all periods and set up from the Sparta for Rome 2 up to the AOC dlc for Attila and lets count how many we can get.

1.Rise of Christianity - What Abount Constantine the Great? Does he fit in this?
2.Rise of Islam starting after 634ad - We got only generals and rulers from all sides.Nothing like a well known great leader.Heraclius was already an old man and the prophet Mohamed - dead
3.Crysis of the third Century is just vannila campaign and fighting corruption,low loyalty for political members and raids from barbarians... but with no nomads and only 1 roman empire(maybe fragmented depends on the starting date)
4.The civil war after the death of Alexander the Great amongst his generals + the migration of the Celts and Galatians in Asia minor and the Balkans
5. Roman invasions in Britania,Dacia,the east and so on arent that interesting - we already saw it in Ceaser in Gaul
6.Age of Vikings - a total reskin of the AOC DLC for Attila and there is already such reskin mod for that DLC on Steam.

Everything else can be created using campaign mods.Do I expect Medieval 2 or anything after that until the Victorian era settings in Saga? Not at all - and CA dont hint at it at all.

[Dude with the Food]

7. Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain, fits the idea that the campaign map will cover a much smaller area.

[FrozenmenSS]

7. Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain, fits the idea that the campaign map will cover a much smaller area.

you know we already got 2DLCs on that front with vikings themed factions (Anglo-Saxons count as such) Is it an overkill a third such DLC/Saga campaign.And King Arthur is there also

In fact The Anglo-Saxon ''Invasion'' of Britain as a theory is falling apart in the last 20-30 years due to



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQrWCEMO7mE

[Dude with the Food]

We've just had 2 full games focused on Romans. Unless we see something completely out of the left field then whatever we get has already been beaten to death already.

[Theramines]

In the current political environment it is unlikely that the protagonists (or "bad guys") in the sagas will be representatives of any contemporary monotheistic religion. My money's on pagans being the "bad guys".

[Gronndar]

In the current political environment it is unlikely that the protagonists (or "bad guys") in the sagas will be representatives of any contemporary monotheistic religion. My money's on pagans being the "bad guys".

Despite it seems in popular media, Vikings and Saxon Stories that pagans are portrayed as "noble savages" who are in tune in with nature and fight for a higher cause while "major religions" are corrupt, backstabbing self serving and destroy all good in the world.

[keona]

Ok lets count all periods and set up from the Sparta for Rome 2 up to the AOC dlc for Attila and lets count how many we can get.

1.Rise of Christianity - What Abount Constantine the Great? Does he fit in this?
2.Rise of Islam starting after 634ad - We got only generals and rulers from all sides.Nothing like a well known great leader.Heraclius was already an old man and the prophet Mohamed - dead
3.Crysis of the third Century is just vannila campaign and fighting corruption,low loyalty for political members and raids from barbarians... but with no nomads and only 1 roman empire(maybe fragmented depends on the starting date)
4.The civil war after the death of Alexander the Great amongst his generals + the migration of the Celts and Galatians in Asia minor and the Balkans
5. Roman invasions in Britania,Dacia,the east and so on arent that interesting - we already saw it in Ceaser in Gaul
6.Age of Vikings - a total reskin of the AOC DLC for Attila and there is already such reskin mod for that DLC on Steam.

Everything else can be created using campaign mods.Do I expect Medieval 2 or anything after that until the Victorian era settings in Saga? Not at all - and CA dont hint at it at all.

I wonder which one they choose. Which one do you think?

Number one is interesting but it still involves Constantine, also there a pretty good mod for Rome II.
The second Rise of Islam, I don't see it without Mohamed as warrior prophet. I think since they will call the game Rise of Islam they would start sometime earlier than 613AD to show chronology.
(offtopic) I would love to play both Campaigns.
Third, It would be very interesting but I don't think so because we experienced that a lot during Attila campaign. I might be wrong.
Fourth, It does fit her description but I don't think that will be the first Saga.
Fifth, I agree with you.
Six I don't think it will be the age of Vikings but something similar.

7. Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain, fits the idea that the campaign map will cover a much smaller area.

I also think that the period they've chosen. Vikings sell really well, but the theme of the game would not be presented as Viking invasion it would be themed as the creation of England I think. They said themselves it a short period where we could play along with the history or change direction completely. Having all the assets from AOC they can totally pull it off.

(offtopic)
Recently tried to play Rome II but could not make me because of horrible UI, AI in battles was just terrible compared to Attila. I wish we had Rome II with Atilla mechanics and 64-bit engine. I personally would pay for that patch.

[FrozenmenSS]

I wonder which one they choose. Which one do you think?

The second Rise of Islam, I don't see it without Mohamed as warrior prophet. I think since they will call the game Rise of Islam they would start sometime earlier than 613AD to show chronology.

The only way a Rise of Islam DLC to work both in anti-islamic hate for Mohamed and both Balancing factions,Campaign AI is 634ad for the Arab playable faction to control all of Arabia and have the recources to fight both the Romans and Sassanids.Thats how i worked with the people whit whom we created a the mod Herakleios: War of Three Faiths for Attila.And somehow there were no religious hatemail for the last 1+ year about the prophet.


My first pick is Rise of Cristianity as a starting Campaign that will be the counter balance to the next one.And then CA will go for a Rise of Islam( I prefer them as a DLC campaigns for Attila for both of them. The Rest of the Time periods ,that I counted,wont be that interesting from a gameplay,factions, the starting setting is not enouch when you see the CAI cant invade Britain in the AOC dlc,and you want in the Saga spin off CAI to start doing it? Too much optimism here.
The civil war after the death of Alexander the Great amongst his generals is already in Rome 2 vannila campaign but with a later date = low chance.Im more fond of Alexander the Great lifetime's campaign but playing as 1 or 2 playable factions in the hole campaign and how probably the CAI for Macedon will react is another no go...

I also think that the period they've chosen. Vikings sell really well, but the theme of the game would not be presented as Viking invasion it would be themed as the creation of England I think. They said themselves it a short period where we could play along with the history or change direction completely. Having all the assets from AOC they can totally pull it off.

Its as easy as with Rise of Cristianity and Rise of Islam where the Roman,Nomadic,Barbarian,Eastern Armies,even the (muslim or not) arabs(because they were lightly armed) were the same or had just minor cosmetic stuff changed compared with TW Attila. But the unit and Faction Variarity by default will be 10 times more than a Viking invasion of Britain for reasons.

(offtopic)
Recently tried to play Rome II but could not make me because of horrible UI, AI in battles was just terrible compared to Attila. I wish we had Rome II with Atilla mechanics and 64-bit engine. I personally would pay for that patch.

Same as me.In 2 days I completed a Rome 2 Long camplaign(Both as the Odriaian Kingdom and the Romans) and uninstaled Rome 2 right after it,because of those reasons and went back to Attila.
(offtopic)
btw the Province management in Rome 2 is still broken after CA broke it in patch 17 for Rome 2 by making the recources global,before that they were local.I even tested it with Odriaian Kingdom what is the limit where i Sacked city after city and the population order was +100 all the time.

[alhoon]

Jack said it would be as long as any total war game, map as large as Attila (it's huge to me) and prices I think they are looking at Fall of Samurai. To me, it seems like a great value.

The only issue I will have CA if they keep using the old engine and not upgrade to 64bit used in Warhammer.

I actually hope for a map with 100-110 settlements, not 186. I like many settlements but Attila lags hard at the end-turn.

[Daruwind]

I actually hope for a map with 100-110 settlements, not 186. I like many settlements but Attila lags hard at the end-turn.

Well for once i´m quite hyped for new Warhammer combined campaign map. Like having 300+ settlements in the end. Im just curious how it will play....

[keona]

The only way a Rise of Islam DLC to work both in anti-islamic hate for Mohamed and both Balancing factions,Campaign AI is 634ad for the Arab playable faction to control all of Arabia and have the recources to fight both the Romans and Sassanids.Thats how i worked with the people whit whom we created a the mod Herakleios: War of Three Faiths for Attila.And somehow there were no religious hatemail for the last 1+ year about the prophet.

I never mentioned hatemail. I just feel it would be more interesting to have Mohamed in the rise of Islam. I can care less about hate mail, there will be always snowflakes who will be offended by something. I think Rise of Islam would be a fun large DLC campaign for Attila.

My first pick is Rise of Cristianity as a starting Campaign that will be the counter balance to the next one.And then CA will go for a Rise of Islam( I prefer them as a DLC campaigns for Attila for both of them. The Rest of the Time periods ,that I counted,wont be that interesting from a gameplay,factions, the starting setting is not enouch when you see the CAI cant invade Britain in the AOC dlc,and you want in the Saga spin off CAI to start doing it? Too much optimism here.
The civil war after the death of Alexander the Great amongst his generals is already in Rome 2 vannila campaign but with a later date = low chance.Im more fond of Alexander the Great lifetime's campaign but playing as 1 or 2 playable factions in the hole campaign and how probably the CAI for Macedon will react is another no go...

Would love to play Rise of Christianity DLC for Attila. Alexander with Attila engine would be great.

Its as easy as with Rise of Cristianity and Rise of Islam where the Roman,Nomadic,Barbarian,Eastern Armies,even the (muslim or not) arabs(because they were lightly armed) were the same or had just minor cosmetic stuff changed compared with TW Attila. But the unit and Faction Variarity by default will be 10 times more than a Viking invasion of Britain for reasons.

..guess we will find out in next few months.

Same as me.In 2 days I completed a Rome 2 Long camplaign(Both as the Odriaian Kingdom and the Romans) and uninstaled Rome 2 right after it,because of those reasons and went back to Attila.

I hope we see a game about Roman Empire on new or at least Attila 64 bit engine with lots of events similar to AOC events during the campaign. Hopefully saga game would be during ancient Rome to late Antiquity. It would be so awesome to see Rome established from small Italian tribes into something more organized.

(offtopic)
btw the Province management in Rome 2 is still broken after CA broke it in patch 17 for Rome 2 by making the recources global,before that they were local.I even tested it with Odriaian Kingdom what is the limit where i Sacked city after city and the population order was +100 all the time.

Don't want to beat the dead horse but Rome II was very disappointing on many fronts.

I actually hope for a map with 100-110 settlements, not 186. I like many settlements but Attila lags hard at the end-turn.

If we have a 64-bit engine we should have a problem like that. As much as I don't like Warhammer with its pistil firing knights, no minor settlement maps, and terrible siege battles (no offense to anyone who likes Warhammer game, it is I just my subjective opinion) I can't seem to make myself to find anything I like about Warhammer apart from 64-bit engine and how smooth it is optimized)

Well for once i´m quite hyped for new Warhammer combined campaign map. Like having 300+ settlements in the end. Im just curious how it will play....

Thant is the only reason I loose interest when I play the late game, the only campaign I was able to finish was ERE Campaign because they are my favorite faction Attila. But I finished AOC with almost every faction except for Charlemagne himself because there was almost no lag in end game.

[alhoon]

Would love to play Rise of Christianity DLC for Attila. Alexander with Attila engine would be great.

I hope we see a game about Roman Empire on new or at least Attila 64 bit engine with lots of events similar to AOC events during the campaign. Hopefully saga game would be during ancient Rome to late Antiquity. It would be so awesome to see Rome established from small Italian tribes into something more organized.

- But long, long ago, we had Alexander Total War; it won't be new. Well, since then practically every game has been doubled so it wouldn't be impossible, but strange. R2TW had the Diadochi.

- I don't think we will see a game about the Roman Empire so soon after R2TW and Attila. Perhaps a game as you describe in the early days of the republic and the first fall of Rome to the Gauls.

[keona]

- But long, long ago, we had Alexander Total War; it won't be new. Well, since then practically every game has been doubled so it wouldn't be impossible, but strange. R2TW had the Diadochi.

- I don't think we will see a game about the Roman Empire so soon after R2TW and Attila. Perhaps a game as you describe in the early days of the republic and the first fall of Rome to the Gauls.

I can see your point, I just really like Rome atmosphere but wish we had Atilla game features in Rome II from get go. But rather experience something new with good mechanics and optimization. I don't even mind Arthurian campaign as long it is not fantasy based.

[Darios]

I am beginning to feel that this thread is rather - unhealthy.

In December, CA told us that they are working on new content for Rome 2/Attila and 8 months later...that is all that we know. I'm as curious as everyone else here to see what the new content will be, but the only clue is a drawing of a Germanic warrior that looks as if it comes from a 19th century opera rather than anything historical.