Honestly, Im from America and I would rather it not be an ACW game. I just find world history much more interesting than US history . That's not to say it couldnt be a good game, I just think it's too smallin scale. That's the main reason I dont like Shogun as much as I should. Top Hat Zebra

Click to expand...

Sounds reasonable Mr Zebra.

After playing Japanese versus Japanese for an entire year now, I don't know if I can stomach another year or two of a restrictive campaign set with only 2 countries(North versus South). M2TWRocks

Click to expand...

A big game with big options, and wide distinctions between units and strategies, would be preferable.
Oh and CA the bigger the game, the more options you’ll have re: DLC
The answer is simple: Total War, not a spot/fragment of war.

mm, i would love an ACW game.

i don't get how people would say it would be to small a map to play etc... have you played the Pennisula campaign?

i think the time period would be great and really replayable, but sadly my confidence in CA to make playable never mind replayable has almost disappeared!

i n fact the only reason i am getting FOTS is due to the involvment of the Americans, as S2 was a HUGE disappointment with arcade style battles, hopefully FOTS will be more like NTW.

fhaggis said:

mm, i would love an ACW game.

i don't get how people would say it would be to small a map to play etc... have you played the Pennisula campaign?

i think the time period would be great and really replayable, but sadly my confidence in CA to make playable never mind replayable has almost disappeared!

Click to expand...

The Peninsular campaign is just one campaign in a game with multiple campaigns, it's hardly a full game

fhaggis said:

i n fact the only reason i am getting FOTS is due to the involvment of the Americans

Click to expand...

I`m the thread starter.

What I meant was that the ACW might be an add-on like the Peninsular War- definitely not as a standalone, but as a DLC with a low price tag such as $5.

Anyway can they please get on with Rome II.

Rome 2 or Medieval 3 hands down are my favorite options, not only because these games are the format and time period that made me fall in love with and adore TW games but because the diversity in the factions, uniforms, battle tactics, and culture is absolutely fantastic. I still play Medieval 2 and Rome. I have enjoyed all the TW games and I am a sucker for Samurai and Shakos (think Napoleonic wars head gear) and the scale of Empire was most satisfying. Just think of how beautiful these games would be with the new engines. The animations could duplicate Gladius and Scutus warfare as well as Phalanx formations while also delivering the most varied and unique looking units we have seen yet. Not only those things but the basis of TW was built around and for massive melee conflicts and blocks and formations of troops. I would not go as far to say I am tired of gunpowder warfare, but I would love for EA to return even further to their roots. People are saying that S2TW was their best seller yet? Well I think it is in huge part due to that most TW players first began their love of the seires with Shogun. Well I started with Rome, and I think it is high time to return to that time period and knock it out of the park.
As for people and the ACW, I am very proud of American history and I love that it is realised in a TW style game, Modders have already done a fantastic job re-creating it and it is free. I am not familiar with Victorian era sadly but I would still like TW to not advance further forward in time than it has already. At this rate their are far too many WW2 games out there and really it strays away from the TW engine of massive formations of units (We can get away with it in musket warfare) but the ACW was proof enough that formation warfare should die with the advance of technology. An american rifle at the time using the Mine ball could shoot accurately 4-5 times the distance that commanders were lining up their troops, thats why the staggering casualties in the ACW. I vote for going back in time, perhaps even a dark ages Total war, during the fall of Rome and Medieval.

Also, greater scale would be a great addition. Napoleon and Shogun were fun but the same basic units in each faction do get old.

Lazarus said:

ripped us all off so horrifically - FORCING you to hand over your money for goods that you never wanted. It's amazing nobody has burnt down the building and decapitated the ringleaders of this elaborate scam.

Click to expand...

Your honour, gentlemen of the jury… hyperbole, overstatement, exaggeration…
For some further elucidation, into what’s transpiring: pot meet kettle.
Awkward.

Rome, Rome, and more Rome.

Big map, expand a bit. Unique nations with unique units, ability to expand on ideas from existing mods for RTW. The new naval combat system is perfect for naval combat of antiquity with ship ramming.



Or a proper world total war game expanding maybe 1000 years, from 700 AD to 1700 AD.

I agree with those who want Rome2, but we need a new engine first. The Phalanx would simply not be effective with the current "duel" system.

There's gotta be some law, for every thread started in the STW2 forums, Rome 2 will be mentioned x amount of times.

I thought that was just sort of implied.

ACW won't happen. Too limited and only we Americans feel any connection to it. Oh and Rome, Rome, Rome!

♘Top Hat Zebra;11110331 said:

I agree with those who want Rome2, but we need a new engine first. The Phalanx would simply not be effective with the current "duel" system.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but not an overhaul, look at the yari ashigaru in spear wall formation, they kill without an animation for the most part. I see the only problem is the pahalanx breaking apart from all the animations. If only they could make it seamless somehow.

I have never used ashigaru in spear wall formation. Do they just kill like they did in Rome? Or the pike units in Medieval?

If it has a moddable map... who cares!?

♘Top Hat Zebra;11115487 said:

I have never used ashigaru in spear wall formation. Do they just kill like they did in Rome? Or the pike units in Medieval?

Click to expand...

LOLWUT. How did you survive this game?


They do a poking animation and then something does a blocking animation or just keels over and dies.

I told you I dont play this game often. I usually just view Ashigaru as something that holds my enemy in place while I kill them all with arrows.

Plus, I was still used to the pikemen from ETW. I thought pikes were still useless.

♘Top Hat Zebra;11110331 said:

I agree with those who want Rome2, but we need a new engine first. The Phalanx would simply not be effective with the current "duel" system.

Click to expand...

Kelts duelled .. romans too when necessary ... that's not the problem, it's the lack of fast moving exploding things that could undo Rome 2.

Reg.

Well, no. I mean for the Japanese it was a large series of duels. For the Romans, it was about working as a unit. For the Greeks, it was staying in your formation ans supporting your fellow soldier.

I would rather see one that covers the time period in Western Europe before the beginning of the American REVOLUTIONARY war and ends well after the American Civil war. There were plenty of other major wars like the 7 years war between England and France before the Revolution, and the Cuban and Mexican Revolution after the civil war to include. Since America was a mostly autonomous colony, it could start out with America basically serving as a colony of Britain. I can think of a couple other colonies that were like that at the time. This would enable several different countries and factions while covering a turbulent but important time period in the Western world. If we had one covering that period that is.

The 3 kingdoms of China would be another good time period. By good I mean there were many factions and plenty of romanticized history to convert into a playable game.

Allch Chcar said:

The 3 kingdoms of China would be another good time period. By good I mean there were many factions and plenty of romanticized history to convert into a playable game.

Click to expand...

I'd love a three kingdoms game, but I feel that the era is driven mainly by heroes performing outstanding feats of valour, which relates poorly into a TW game. Just look at S2 and the lack of many famous samurai.

jonny duck said:

I'd love a three kingdoms game, but I feel that the era is driven mainly by heroes performing outstanding feats of valour, which relates poorly into a TW game. Just look at S2 and the lack of many famous samurai.

Click to expand...

Actually there are numerous heroes during Sengoku Jidai. Uesugi Kenshin, Takeda Shingen, Chosokabe Motochika, Date Masamune, Hojo Ujimasa(his father always dies early in my games) etc. Not in any order, BTW.

So I have to disagree with you on that point.

Allch Chcar said:

I would rather see one that covers the time period in Western Europe before the beginning of the American REVOLUTIONARY war and ends well after the American Civil war. There were plenty of other major wars like the 7 years war between England and France before the Revolution, and the Cuban and Mexican Revolution after the civil war to include. Since America was a mostly autonomous colony, it could start out with America basically serving as a colony of Britain. I can think of a couple other colonies that were like that at the time. This would enable several different countries and factions while covering a turbulent but important time period in the Western world. If we had one covering that period that is.

The 3 kingdoms of China would be another good time period. By good I mean there were many factions and plenty of romanticized history to convert into a playable game.

Click to expand...

That's..... Pretty much Empire.

Allch Chcar said:

Actually there are numerous heroes during Sengoku Jidai. Uesugi Kenshin, Takeda Shingen, Chosokabe Motochika, Date Masamune, Hojo Ujimasa(his father always dies early in my games) etc. Not in any order, BTW.

So I have to disagree with you on that point.

Click to expand...

Hattori Hanzo, Honda Tadakatsu, Akechi Mitsuhide, Suzuki Magoichi, Shibata Katsuie, Sakon Shima. There were many notable individuals not included in the game due to the nature of it's characters. That list also excludes many of the famous Samurai who fought during the battle of Sekigahara.

My point was that many of the stories and conflicts in the three kingdoms period were driven by personal feats of valour. There were some large battles that involved the use of excellent tactics and technological innovations but without a way to represent a lot of the main characters then the game wouldn't be that good (And I'd rather they don't do it than make a hash of it).

♘Top Hat Zebra;11123089 said:

That's..... Pretty much Empire.

Click to expand...

Same period, but completely different focus.

♘Top Hat Zebra;11119738 said:

I told you I dont play this game often. I usually just view Ashigaru as something that holds my enemy in place while I kill them all with arrows.

Plus, I was still used to the pikemen from ETW. I thought pikes were still useless.

Click to expand...

Hardly in my opinion, I use Samurai as shock troops and Elite warriors, I will try to match enemy numbers with Samurai and overwhelm with Ashigaru in spear wall formations. They really can hold their own when used correctly. I know it is hard to stay sucked in with Shogun because of the lack of variety and I wish they would have opened up the map to include Korea, China, Mongolia, and the rest of SE Asia. Other than that I am impressed with the game, especially presentation, I love the music, the menus, the whole thing. But I am ready for a remake of Rome, we have had a pleasant 2 and a half game vacation to gunpowder land (excluding medieval 2's gunpowder aspect is very acceptable) Time to return to our roots!

Why don't they release a game based on the 17th century? Late 16th century till 1699?
Pike and shot era. Could have a good combination of gun powered units, with melee units.
While I like ETW and NTW, compared to M2 and Shogun 2, the game lacks the flare and fun level for me.
A Victorian game seems fun at first, but like ETW and NTW, it could get boring after a while.
But, Rome 2 would be nice.

jonny duck said:

I'd love a three kingdoms game, but I feel that the era is driven mainly by heroes performing outstanding feats of valour, which relates poorly into a TW game. Just look at S2 and the lack of many famous samurai.

Click to expand...

A common enough misconception. But think about it - aside from the true greats such as Zhao Yun, Lu Bu, that one occasion where Guan Yu lopped off Yan Liangs head, that unfortunate run in Xiahou Dun had with an oncoming arrow... These guys were generals, and they behaved as such (i.e. not charing in to the thick of things every other day, rather only once or twice in a whole career).

To me, Three Kingdoms Total War is certainly plausible. Only two things I would worry about is how you implement the famous strategies that people used, such as Zhao Yun's empty city, or the ever romanticized Stone Sentinal maze, and exactly which generals you choose to make the cut. (Though I suppose you could do like NTW did, and have pre-determined people become "hireable" at certain stages...)