New Attila Content in 2017

[FrozenmenSS]

Why the Climate change should gradually reverse towards the end of the 5th century?? The same Climate change stayed till the 8th century at least.It doesnt make sence.One of the not known reasons for the Arab expansion in the 7th century with the Rise of Islam was the climate became more drier For example North Africa became a dry coastline with no vegitation compared with the 3rd-4th century and still is to the present day.Untill then it was the Breadbacket of the Roman Empire together with Egypt

[Charerg]

Why the Climate change should gradually reverse towards the end of the 5th century?? The same Climate change stayed till the 8th century at least.It doesnt make sence.One of the not known reasons for the Arab expansion in the 7th century with the Rise of Islam was the climate became more drier For example North Africa became a dry coastline with no vegitation compared with the 3rd-4th century and still is to the present day.Untill then it was the Breadbacket of the Roman Empire together with Egypt

The desertification of North Africa was more due to Roman economic practices (hacking down all forests to make room for fields), and the Arab follow-up (who were herders rather than farmers, and grazed their flocks on the former fields, and also lacked the Roman knowledge of irrigation techniques). It's largely a man-made phenomenon, not something due to climate change per se.

[FrozenmenSS]

The desertification of North Africa was more due to Roman economic practices (hacking down all forests to make room for fields), and the Arab follow-up (who were herders rather than farmers, and grazed their flocks on the former fields, and also lacked the Roman knowledge of irrigation techniques). It's largely a man-made phenomenon, not something due to climate change per se.

It was both.The wells in those regions became 2-4 times deeper to reach the water in North Africa.And lets not forget the migration of arab tribes from Yemen to the Roman lands and became feoderati.And When the Climate in Europe becomes colder the Middle East and North Afrrica one becomes drier.

[Darios]

I would still like to see a Sarmatian cultural group implemented into the game. I cringe everytime I see "copy-paste Hunnic" Iazyges, Roxolani, etc. I dunno why CA simply won't make them into copy-paste Alani and give them a unique Sarmatian religion.

[Theramines]

Climate change is a problem late in the campaign because in the northern regions you can move without attrition only in summer. The rest of the year you're practically immobile, making for a tedious and unrealistic 4 turns per year campaign. At least soften it, so that you can move in spring or autumn. An alternative, perhaps, would be to unlock resistance to winter attrition as a tech on the tech tree.

[Doe3000]

I hope that for Rome II at least they add a Britannic and Germanic Faction pack. It always strikes me as a bit funny when looking at the Rome II faction menu to have the plural tribes for the Germanic and Britannic groups, when they only get a single faction each. For me at least it was if they always planned on adding more factions to that list, but cancelled all plans when Rome II recieved such a heavy backlash back in late 2013/early 2014.

If CA really do make new content for Attila, like others here, I hope it will be new mini-campaigns ala 'Age of Charlemagne' and 'the Last Roman'.

[Darios]

I hope that for Rome II at least they add a Britannic and Germanic Faction pack. It always strikes me as a bit funny when looking at the Rome II faction menu to have the plural tribes for the Germanic and Britannic groups, when they only get a single faction each. For me at least it was if they always planned on adding more factions to that list, but cancelled all plans when Rome II recieved such a heavy backlash back in late 2013/early 2014.

The thing is, there simply isn't a lot of information out there to justify creating more than one Germanic and Briton tribe from the pre-Roman era. If you look at the roster that the Suebi have for example, they have pretty much every "stereotypical" unit one would expect a pre-Roman era Germanic faction to have. The same goes for the Britonic Iceni. There's simply not enough historical diversity there to justify creating another faction without making it copy/paste or inventing some of the ahistorical "badass units" that you see in Attila.

[Abdülmecid I]

CA's goal obviously is to maintain the attention and interest of their history fans not attracted by Warhammer's universe, until the release of their next historical game, at best in 2019 (more probably, in my opinion, around 2020). A faction DLC wouldn't be enough, especially if it concerns barely known factions and popular factions, such as the Armenians or the Bulgars. However, going fully Medieval is too much and I doubt that they are willing enough to spend so many resources for what essentially is a PR project, which I wouldn't be surprised if they plan to sell it for free. The ideal average is something closer to Charlemagne DLC or the Augustus edition of Rome II. Especially the latter seems like quite a tempting option, as it offered a huge campaign, without requiring too much work, since most of its models were actually copy-pasted from the original game. Regarding Attila, the only periods available that could be popular are either an Arthurian campaign, where you can put everyone, from the Holy Grail to Vikings, or a Constantinian version of the main game. The first choice is less likely, though, because its popularity would probably be not that great, outside the British Isles and perhaps the United States, not to mention the Viking Forefathers pre-order DLC.

That being said, I suspect that the advertised content is actually designed for Rome II and not Attila, given the fact that, according to Steam Spy, the former has sold more copies and is currently played by more customers, which is a hugely determining factor fora company's marketing policy. In Rome II, the only possible candidate seems to be Alexander. Barely anyone cares about the adventures of Aurelian, Marcus Aurelius or Trajan, while the Spartans! crowd has already been exploited by the Greek cities DLC and Wrath of Sparta, which makes another DLC depicting the Median wars slightly redundant. Alexander, on the other hand, could provide a large campaign map, while the rosters of the majority of factions are perfectly capable of being copy-pasted from the Macedonians, Parthians, Massagetae and Odryssians of the main game and Persians and Greek cities of the Wrath of Sparta. Just create a new map, add some colourful units to the Indians, prepare your moderation staff for the inevitable political flame-wars in your forums and release the game. An extra advantage is that its predecessor was so sloppily created, that any comparison would be at the advantage of the second game.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Fun fact: Porus'India was controlled by the Persians, because the Indians were present only in custom and historical battles. However, the region was totally inaccessible, thanks to rivers and forested coastlines, which means that it was rather probable that you would never be able to defeat the Achaemenids, if a family member happened to spawn there.
In conclusion: Alexander>Constantine>Arthur.

[skep155]

CA's goal obviously is to maintain the attention and interest of their history fans not attracted by Warhammer's universe, until the release of their next historical game, at best in 2019 (more probably, in my opinion, around 2020). A faction DLC wouldn't be enough

Agreed. Very optimistic that they might release another historical DLC.

Regarding Attila, the only periods available that could be popular are either an Arthurian campaign, where you can put everyone, from the Holy Grail to Vikings

This is where I disagree. Arthur, is according to many modern historians, a mythical character who never existed or at the very most was a legendary character based on another historical person. If your going to have an Arthurian DLC you might as well have another Warhammer DLC instead.

I could however see a DLC campaign based upon King Alfred the Great and the Viking invasions.

[Karak Norn Clansman]

Fingers crossed CA do continue to deliver historical DLC campaigns for Attila. But I won't purchase anything other than on sale and when it's acknowledged as bug-free by players. It's all good and proper that they do Warhammer, and if rights could be purchased it could be worth to do a Lotr and Game of Thrones spinoff as well with the game engine (after all both are grand warfare fantasies, and there are very good reasons why they've made it into polished mods), but ultimately there are so many historical periods to cover, and fans to please there as well.

Building upon the Attila engine they could e.g. do the destructive eastern Roman-Sassanid Persia tug of war, Islamic conquests, Warring States period in ancient China, bronze age Total War, rise and fall of Assyria, Viking invasions, rise of the Aztecs, Mongol invasions, Cyrus' conquest, Alexander's conquest (again!) or even classical Greece campaigns complete with Persian and Peloponesian wars.

Going forward, I believe it is crucial that the Creative Assembly supply modders with world-building tools. Last time I checked, the Westeros Attila mod was for custom battles only! Given the horribly slow fast-forward function in Attila, I use autoresolve as much as possible, and at the end of the day a visually glorious custom battle on its own is only a stunted part of what strategy players truly want, namely a polished grand strategy map slugfest.

[Heathen Hammer]

CA's goal obviously is to maintain the attention and interest of their history fans not attracted by Warhammer's universe, until the release of their next historical game, at best in 2019 (more probably, in my opinion, around 2020).

Nah, knowing current CA they will probably release a historic title mid-2018. Keep in mind, that its development has been going on since the last Attila DLC release, if not earlier, while a totally different team is doing Warhammer games.
My main concern is that it will be as rushed as Rome 2 was.

[macd1]

I have recently returned to this game and like it a lot, bugs and all. All they have to do for me is to allow us to skip all AI moves in between turns (especially agents moves), and an option to fast forward battle animations in between turns. This issue is so awful, literally doubles the time it takes to get to my turn.

BTW, is there a mod that fixes this issue that doesn't disable agents?

[macd1]

Also remove the "survive until 450" requirement to end the campaign and the "destroy" 30 factions requirement (most of factions get destroyed in early game, so by late game I have to chase down random factions in Asia to win. they are unnecessary when you are already steamrolling everyone.

[grasu]

For those of you who aren't aware, there's been a new depot added to Attila on Steam called "Koala". It might be indicative of new DLC and/or a patch.

Here's the reddit thread.

https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/co...edition_patch/

[Daruwind]

Check the reddit comment from GRACE_CA ;-) BTW check other total wars and their version history... Empire - last change 2 months ago, Shogn2 - Month ago.. Medieval2 - 3 months ago...

[Darios]

While I totally understand why CA can't confirm that there will be a new DLC, it honestly does look like a new content is being worked on.

I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up getting a new release sometime in May or June.

[FrozenmenSS]

Just to remind you guys:
The Faction DLCs for Rome 2 and Attila were releaced in 3 months gap between themself and for the Campaign DLCs the gap was 6 months without mixing the Faction/Campaign DLCs...So counting from March 17 2017 expect something in June for the next Faction DLC or in September for the next Campaign DLC.This is my best prediction on the question ''When?''

[Daruwind]

Just to remind you guys:
The Faction DLCs for Rome 2 and Attila were releaced in 3 months gap between themself and for the Campaign DLCs the gap was 6 months without mixing the Faction/Campaign DLCs...So counting from March 17 2017 expect something in June for the next Faction DLC or in September for the next Campaign DLC.This is my best prediction on the question ''When?''

Exactly this and if next historical title is out in 2019/2020 well then i can easily imagine one DLC for Rome and one for Attila being released in 2018/2019 depending on next historical title release date....This is more about marketing and getting something for history fans in meantime between "now" and "next histrical game". I don´t expect anything rushed even if it is faction DLC at the end.

[WhiskeySykes]

I don't know Britain's copyright laws, but there are international databases for searching patents. If titles or expansions need to be registered, they would appear in the database at some point. That's how the Elder Scrolls community discovered Skyrim was probably the setting, years in advance to release. If the law's more nuanced, pardon my ignorance.

[Daruwind]

I don't know Britain's copyright laws, but there are international databases for searching patents. If titles or expansions need to be registered, they would appear in the database at some point. That's how the Elder Scrolls community discovered Skyrim was probably the setting, years in advance to release. If the law's more nuanced, pardon my ignorance.

There is probably difference if you are register whole IP and if you have already that done and are just pushing out DLCs...