News: won't be RTW2 or MTW 3!!! Revelation.

[panzerschreck]

And i think it won't be like usualy in march or April... The previous time we already know in june what new title it was

[SkyTrickster]

And i think it won't be like usualy in march or April... The previous time we already know in june what new title it was

But it came out in february.. my guess is that the new TW title will be announced in october/november.

[Dubh the dark]

Whatever they decide on, I hope they leave firearms aside for a while.

Long melee battles between distinct units from distinct nations, where strategy rather than money to purchase lots of guns is key, could rekindle my interest in the series.

I'm getting bored of TW games now, they don't evolve much - the diplomacy is dreadful for instance and character traits etc. seem to be regressing.

Also the lack of large towns/cities on the battlemap since Empire is disappointing.

The series needs an overhaul to add details again, now that the BAI/CAI is somewhat better.

[Tony83]

Does it really matter what they bring out next? If it's as unmoddable as the past three games have been, after a twelvemonth it will join them in obscurity. In my opinion, RTW was the right game with the right features at the right time, however, even there it was the mods that made it into a classic!

Since Rome, all CA have done is tinker with the formula and attach prettier graphics. Admittedly the sea battles in Empire and Napoleon are cool (S2's are just a bloody nonsense!) but the basic premiss of TW is getting stale and tired. The brand needs to reinvent and invigorate itself - are we doomed forever to live in the land of twenty 160 unit armies and 20 ship fleets? Is CA capable of thinking outside the box?

[Fuyff]

they would need to lose money on a game/formula to reinvent. right now they laughing all the way to the bank

[MorganH.]

they would need to lose money on a game/formula to reinvent. right now they laughing all the way to the bank

Im my opinion the money they have earned sofar should buy them some developing and breathing space to try and reinvent the series.
More finetuning and like Tony says''thinking outside of the box'' would only earn them more money in future.

[Primergy]

The brand needs to reinvent and invigorate itself - are we doomed forever to live in the land of twenty 160 unit armies and 20 ship fleets? Is CA capable of thinking outside the box?

Thats why i think a more modern TW would be the best for the series, to me the whole concept already got boring since Empire and i never finished a campaign since then. And besides the few first battles which i play manually the others get autoresolved thanks to boring battlefields and unimportant battles. A modern TW would atleast force them to make changes, but when they go for a Rome, or any other somewhat melee based games, they will reuse as much code as possible while only making slight detail adjustments (turtle formation... yay :/).

[Shamefur Dispray]

yeah people throwing rocks at one another will be popular

[daniu]

I found the two sentences in the current interview with Craig and Jack when asked whether they thought WWII was possible sounded disturbingly non-refuting.

[Propaganda]

You users make me laugh. You all talk about madnes, about what you dont know. Just tell me how you imagine modern total war or world war one? Tactis and all that is different, they will never do it. They do only mass warfare, man to man fight not distance fight.

[Lord Baal]

Halo Total Wars is existent already. AKA Halo Wars

Halo Wars was more like C&C meets Halo, a shame indeed.
A truly Halo Total War would have you a big ass strategic map representing the start systems involved on the conflict, with each planet sub divided in a few ground zones ala regular Total War. It would have space battles and ground battles too. Something like Empire at War but with turn based strategy instead of real time and with several ground areas for every planet instead of just one.

And I don't believe there will be a RTW2. Why?
Let's lay out history. RTW1 is about the rise of Rome, and the falling of Alexander's (already diminished) empire.
RTW: Barbarian Invasion - Is about the fall of Rome, and the rise of Christianity, and the invasion of Huns/Mongols.
RTW: Alexander - Goes through Alexander the Great's conquest of Persia and into India.
There isn't much left of RTW that is WORTH making. They covered all aspects of the Roman Empire. They're going through every scrap of history.

They already done Shogun and Medieval, and both of those games have a second iteration.

WW1 Total War won't be made because ... in ALL total war games, you get settlements that RECRUIT units. WW1's history doesn't work like this ... it's a whole freaking nation that pulls troops out. You can't individually train garrisons in your cities.
Total War games are about conquest. WW1 is about striking back. So yeah :S.

Nope, actually a WW1 game would be better represented, you don't recruit in every little town but where the army bases are, those recruitment automatically subtracts people from settlements in all the region. This is where it works now, despite the fact that in ancient times more often than not there wasn't anything like central recruitment at all. The current system shows a centralization at the level of industrial eras. Beyond all this any kind of recruitment can be abstracted at the developer please.

We can safely say RTW games won't be made anymore. And neither will MTW3.

Based on what?

WHAT I DO WANT TO SEE:
I haven't seen CA make Ancient River Civilizations: Total War
If you take WHAP, then you should know all about Mesopotamia, Egypt, Indus Valley, and China. Have different campaigns based on different time set. Remember: they haven't even done a CHINA total war.

This is an interesting proposition, I would however suggest a change on the name to something more appealing like Cradle of Mankind, Bronze Age or simply Ancient Civilizations Total War.
I would say that to refresh the title they could start making a game which includes the whole world in each iteration and divide it on centuries that define eras (most likely based on occidental history in the case of the most relative recent one) and then ship each game with retro compatibility so you start with a Bronze age nation, advance it to Iron/Classical age and when the Dark Ages game comes out you can load your last save game into this and keep playing.
On Propaganda quote, yes, they have been proven to be deceitful in the past, so I would not trust them while saying they won't do Rome 2 or a WW1 Total War.

[Legio X Gemina]

Halo Wars was more like C&C meets Halo, a shame indeed.
A truly Halo Total War would have you a big ass strategic map representing the start systems involved on the conflict, with each planet sub divided in a few ground zones ala regular Total War. It would have space battles and ground battles too. Something like Empire at War but with turn based strategy instead of real time and with several ground areas for every planet instead of just one.



They already done Shogun and Medieval, and both of those games have a second iteration.

Nope, actually a WW1 game would be better represented, you don't recruit in every little town but where the army bases are, those recruitment automatically subtracts people from settlements in all the region. This is where it works now, despite the fact that in ancient times more often than not there wasn't anything like central recruitment at all. The current system shows a centralization at the level of industrial eras. Beyond all this any kind of recruitment can be abstracted at the developer please.

Based on what?

This is an interesting proposition, I would however suggest a change on the name to something more appealing like Cradle of Mankind, Bronze Age or simply Ancient Civilizations Total War.
I would say that to refresh the title they could start making a game which includes the whole world in each iteration and divide it on centuries that define eras (most likely based on occidental history in the case of the most relative recent one) and then ship each game with retro compatibility so you start with a Bronze age nation, advance it to Iron/Classical age and when the Dark Ages game comes out you can load your last save game into this and keep playing.
On Propaganda quote, yes, they have been proven to be deceitful in the past, so I would not trust them while saying they won't do Rome 2 or a WW1 Total War.

O. You just made all my arguments look like crap x). Now that I do think about it, a WW1 would be similar to MTW2. MTW2s cities/fortresses. Cities = income. Fortresses = Units. I gotcha...

And China Total War sounds great too. Warring States Period would be a great place to start off at.

[Shamefur Dispray]

O. You just made all my arguments look like crap x). Now that I do think about it, a WW1 would be similar to MTW2. MTW2s cities/fortresses. Cities = income. Fortresses = Units. I gotcha...

And China Total War sounds great too. Warring States Period would be a great place to start off at.

Actually you do that all by yourself

[Sbygneus]

R2TW, Colonial, Medieval 3 or something new... do whatever but please do great sea battles(and sea to land battles on the same time) you landlubbers!

[Azog 150]

I could see a WW1 TW as possible, but it would involve a vast overhaul of the game mechanics and it would be something in many ways unrecognisable to previous TW games. Thats not necessarily a bad thing, Total War could do with some drastic changes- the old formula is great but is also getting a bit stale.

WW1 battles involved hundreds of thousands if not millions of men and they would need to do something to represent that scale. Maybe they could divide it into three maps instead of two.

They could have the strategy map, in which you move around armies, handle recruitment, research, political affairs and all the rest of it. You would recruit entire divisions, not just company sized units. You could assign an army to attack, and choose which divisions you want to use in the attack and all the rest of it. It would look a lot like the strategy map that we know from previous TW games.

They could then have the battle map, but not in the sense we think of it. It would zoom in to the battlefield, but as WW1 battlefields were often miles long involved many thousands of men, the battle map would represent the battle on a very general scale. You could issue orders to divisions, artillery squadrons, recon planes, miners etc and assign them to different sectors of the battlefield, with different objectives to attack or defend. It would be like the Generals view of the battlefield- you wouldn't see individual men, but rather an icon to represent a unit on a large scale map (It would look more like the old strategy maps off Shogun or Medieval TW). You could handle reinforcements, replacing understrength divisions etc (Or alternatively you could auto-assign certain units to replace other units when they reach a certain strength). This could be turn based or maybe real time but with a pause feature, and as battles often raged for months at a time you could zoom back out to the strategy map to send in more men to the meat grinder and handle other affairs that need to be dealt with, before zooming back into the battle

Finally, there could be the map that would be more like the battle maps that we know and love from previous TW games. Basically, you would choose a sector of the battlefield to zoom into and control (The most vital sector), and you could control individual units (Battalions) as they battle it out across no-mans land. You could call in any off-map artillery you have assigned to support the sector, and then watch as your men attempt to battle their way across no-mans land (Or defend it). Other sectors could be auto resolved based on the success you have in this sector, and the decisions you made in the Generals view. Eventually, as the game progresses, you could start employing poison gas, tanks, tactical air support, bicycle infantry, cavalry, creeping barrages, stormtroopers, miners and all the rest of it.

Depending on whether you win or loose the sector and your decisions in the General-view, the battle would then progress to other sectors.

[Dubh the dark]

I could see a WW1 TW as possible, but it would involve a vast overhaul of the game mechanics and it would be something in many ways unrecognisable to previous TW games. Thats not necessarily a bad thing, Total War could do with some drastic changes- the old formula is great but is also getting a bit stale.

WW1 battles involved hundreds of thousands if not millions of men and they would need to do something to represent that scale. Maybe they could divide it into three maps instead of two.

They could have the strategy map, in which you move around armies, handle recruitment, research, political affairs and all the rest of it. You would recruit entire divisions, not just company sized units. You could assign an army to attack, and choose which divisions you want to use in the attack and all the rest of it. It would look a lot like the strategy map that we know from previous TW games.

They could then have the battle map, but not in the sense we think of it. It would zoom in to the battlefield, but as WW1 battlefields were often miles long involved many thousands of men, the battle map would represent the battle on a very general scale. You could issue orders to divisions, artillery squadrons, recon planes, miners etc and assign them to different sectors of the battlefield, with different objectives to attack or defend. It would be like the Generals view of the battlefield- you wouldn't see individual men, but rather an icon to represent a unit on a large scale map (It would look more like the old strategy maps off Shogun or Medieval TW). You could handle reinforcements, replacing understrength divisions etc (Or alternatively you could auto-assign certain units to replace other units when they reach a certain strength). This could be turn based or maybe real time but with a pause feature, and as battles often raged for months at a time you could zoom back out to the strategy map to send in more men to the meat grinder and handle other affairs that need to be dealt with, before zooming back into the battle

Finally, there could be the map that would be more like the battle maps that we know and love from previous TW games. Basically, you would choose a sector of the battlefield to zoom into and control (The most vital sector), and you could control individual units (Battalions) as they battle it out across no-mans land. You could call in any off-map artillery you have assigned to support the sector, and then watch as your men attempt to battle their way across no-mans land (Or defend it). Other sectors could be auto resolved based on the success you have in this sector, and the decisions you made in the Generals view. Eventually, as the game progresses, you could start employing poison gas, tanks, tactical air support, bicycle infantry, cavalry, creeping barrages, stormtroopers, miners and all the rest of it.

Depending on whether you win or loose the sector and your decisions in the General-view, the battle would then progress to other sectors.

Great idea, I've thought about that myself, zooming from an overvew of Europe into more detailed maps like with the Peninsular campaign.

Your idea of a third map showing a large battle field that you can zoom into at points is an interesting proposal. It would certainly make more sense to have the units on screen represent a skirmish in a larger battle.

[Shamefur Dispray]

Income: Total War is my bet

[Phier]

The TW series as we know it is puttering out. Just look at the mods for Rome and M2, then empire, now Shogun 2. The energy is gone, the support is waining.

[Eikki]

Renaissance total war from 1550-1650, playable factions: England, Scotland(can form union if certain conditions met), France, Spain, Sweden, Holy Roman Empire(with Austria under direct control and other german states as protectorates), Poland-Lithuania, Muscovy, Ottoman Empire. That would be great.

[Vindictus]

There are a select few CA can make, and still make a great profit. I did like LegendXVI's points. I do like the idea of Ancient Civ Total War, or China Total War