TW series and Paradise lost........Why TW games don't move me anymore

[hellas1]

Hi everyone,

As some of you might know, I've started playing the TW series since Shogun: WE

Now that I see STW with gatling guns (which is nice), the entire series EVEN RTW mods have me with a severe case of lost interest in this series.

Why?
Well, it all started when I started looking at game called Les Grognards and seeing the richness that that particular game IS.

The fire was fueled by reading books about the campaigns of Napoleon by David G. Chandler along with his works on Marlborough & 17th century warfare and Theodore Ayrault Dodge's books on Alexander, Caesar, Gustav Adolphus and Napoleon.

It progressed after reading books like Command in War by Martin Van Creveld and such.

It reached its' zenith with watching veterans coming back from Iraq & Afghanistan (I work at the local V.A. Medical Center a mile away from my home and I'm also a disabled veteran.)

Essentially these salient points:
I. Historically accurate Strategic developments are not researched and subsequently provided to the player
II. Historical accurate Tactical developments are lacking also.....See above
III. No Strategic/Tactical/Logical overlay maps synthesizing the dynamicism of warfare
IV. Constant issues with Sega/Ca and having AI which properly portrays each level of difficulty

It is a shame to view past Activision/Sega CA titles with the developments today but one is left thinking "Will this era be covered again PROPERLY and FULLY with the now realized computer technologies available?" I don't really know personally.

So, here we are fellow members of the Forum.
Comments, Quips, Concerns?
hellas1.5........just drained......Ironclads or not....

[Dynamo11]

Sounds like you've transitioned into a realm where Les Grognards and Europa Universalis are your only vices. I'm sorry that Total War isn't as simulatory as you wished but TW has never really been about historical accuracy.

[Captain Arrrgh!]

Complexity with TW reached its apex with Empire: Several differnet continents to manage; more intricate trade; three tech tree routes; a very in depth political system within your faction, etc. But then it started dropping in complexity there after.
Shogun 2 has made great improvements in gameplay, but not enough to counter their snake oil marketing and BS.
They've told us with each new release that the game is new and improved and this time 'such and such' has been heavily improved. Well, gameplay-wise, Rome is Medieval is Shogun 2.
Nobody should be surprised that their next release will have similar gameplay, but with prettier graphics.
And to top it off, it looks like their older model of game > xpack > xpack is now being replaced by game > DLC that should have been in game > same > same > entirely new game based off same era and engine that is sold separately but should have ben an xpack (Napoleon, FotS).

Then the lie to us about the 'high cost of game making', when actually they no longer have to print big thick booklets (manual now a pdf with software) and over half their sales are download via Steam and getting larger, so not as much spent on packaging.

Meh. I can't do it any more. After FotS, I'm done. Even the blather and hype about Skyrim bore more fruit than the hollow promises from CA and their overlord SEGA.

[Jack Lusted]

We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.

Then the lie to us about the 'high cost of game making', when actually they no longer have to print big thick booklets (manual now a pdf with software) and over half their sales are download via Steam and getting larger, so not as much spent on packaging.

When we talk about the high cost of making games, we are not talking about distribution. That is a relatively small cost. We are talking about the cost of developing games. The fact that team sizes are bigger, the cost of voice overs, localisation, software licences and a multitude of other things. I'm not sure why you would think we were talking about distribution.

[|Kenshin|]

"We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for" now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.



When we talk about the high cost of making games, we are not talking about distribution. That is a relatively small cost. We are talking about the cost of developing games. The fact that team sizes are bigger, the cost of voice overs, localisation, software licences and a multitude of other things. I'm not sure why you would think we were talking about distribution.

This

[The_Nord]

We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.



When we talk about the high cost of making games, we are not talking about distribution. That is a relatively small cost. We are talking about the cost of developing games. The fact that team sizes are bigger, the cost of voice overs, localisation, software licences and a multitude of other things. I'm not sure why you would think we were talking about distribution.

Hey Mr. Lusted. I'm glad that you're so self-aware of your product. But I feel you need to add depth to the combat in the game, land battles, naval battles and sieges. We took a huge step forward in terms of naval battles with ETW, but I can't say the same for siege battles and land battles, those have remained basically the same, and siege battles have gotten consistently worse with each TW-title since M2TW. I see you have taken some steps in this regard with fots, with re-adding upgradable towers that utilize different types of ammunition, (bows to bullets) and the fact that you've now made it so you can control 40 units at once. You need to continue with this, hollowing out siege battles and land battles, making them more simplistic, won't net you any more customers I believe, and I want you to have as many customers as possible because I love the TW-games and want as many of them as possible!

[The Juggernaut]

Hey Mr. Lusted. I'm glad that you're so self-aware of your product. But I feel you need to add depth to the combat in the game, land battles, naval battles and sieges. We took a huge step forward in terms of naval battles with ETW, but I can't say the same for siege battles and land battles, those have remained basically the same, and siege battles have gotten consistently worse with each TW-title since M2TW. I see you have taken some steps in this regard with fots, with re-adding upgradable towers that utilize different types of ammunition, (bows to bullets) and the fact that you've now made it so you can control 40 units at once. You need to continue with this, hollowing out siege battles and land battles, making them more simplistic, won't net you any more customers I believe, and I want you to have as many customers as possible because I love the TW-games and want as many of them as possible!

Absolutely right! What I'd really like are realistic sieges that take multiple turns to complete, and multiple assaults to finish. While the current siege mechanics are ok, what I'd really like would be walls your siege guns could slowly wear down randomly (psuedo-randomly, focus on outer walls and towers) and multiple check points in an assault. Instead of 1 main capture point, maybe several, one for each layer. once you take these, you have the option to rest your troops for that turn with that taken. If that's impractical, then I definitely think towers and the tonshu should be occupiable.

I'm definitely looking forward to everything with naval battles and the like in FotS, but please make the diplomacy AI more intelligent. Shogun 2 was DEFINITELY a huge step in the right direction, but a 20 province clan should be able to threaten a 1 province clan without question, and I'd like a bit more authority over my vassals. It's probably aa bit too late for that, but maybe next time.


You guys seem to be going for just the right amount of depth for a beginner or medium player, but maybe include a "campaign realism mode" as well? It's really hard for the AI to ambush you if you know exactly how many units he has of each type before going into battle.

[NEXUS12]

We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released

I agree with everything else you said but I beg to differ on this point. For starters, the AI took a gigantic step back from Med2 to Empire. You released a game which focussed on different continents yet the AI refused to invade India if it wasnt controlled by the human player. The AI refused to invade the island of Great Britain even if they were more powerful with their navies and armies. The AI would invade your fort with three units when you had 15 stacked in it. The fort battles were so bugged, getting your men to fire the wall cannons was impossible. For a game that was released in this day and age, and with the limited modding power available to the hard working people on this forum and others, that simply wasn't good enough.

However I do not want to be percieved as a Total War hater, because I love the franchise barring Empire, and Shogun 2 was indeed a massive step forward in my opinion, and I congratulate you for the work on S2. I will cetainly be buying Fots and if that is a success, as I am sure it will be, I will continue to purchase the TW games.

I just wanted to offer my opinion on your claim that gameplay has improved with every release. It's almost true, except from what I pointed out.

Finally, the suggestion by someone above to have less but more important battles is a great idea. It's too easy right now to make a 3000 strong army every few turns (where did all the men come from!?) and march across a country with ease. Also a great idea is to have to supply your seiging armies, I love that. Just my two cents!

[Sir Sesshaku]

but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement

I hope that means "we do not want to make a Hearts of Iron kind of campaign" BUT, we will add more micromanagment, options and diversity to the campaign in a "civ" kind of way. Because seriously, the concept of the campaign right now it's far too seen and to similar in each game.
Shogun 2 was a step fordward with this rpg elements, returning to a family tree (that needs improvement), etc. You need to add more of that stuff, more diplomacy options, more campaign options. But always knowing that you are not going to overcharged it, we don't want a sim, but we don't want also a really easy and shallow game, we wan't a good medium-advanced term. A game where we can have fun, but where we have options of how to play it.
I think something that TW need is to add more of that "building a civilization" feeling. Making it your own place, choosing how is the goverment, the economy, the culture, and the army of your empire. And to have that doesn't necesary means to do it complicated or to completly screw history, there are easy but cool ways to make it. Right now, i play shogun 2 and i feel a only military but shallow game. And i know, its "total war", but i don't ask you to eliminate war, i ask you to add more options, more ways of playing or getting there.
English it's not my native language so i hope i made my point.

Keep the good work. Glad to see you are answering fans and encouraging discussions.

[NEXUS12]

I hope that means "we do not want to make a Hearts of Iron kind of campaign" BUT, we will add more micromanagment, options and diversity to the campaign in a "civ" kind of way. Because seriously, the concept of the campaign right now it's far too seen and to similar in each game.
Shogun 2 was a step fordward with this rpg elements, returning to a family tree (that needs improvement), etc. You need to add more of that stuff, more diplomacy options, more campaign options. But always knowing that you are not going to overcharged it, we don't want a sim, but we don't want also a really easy and shallow game, we wan't a good medium-advanced term. A game where we can have fun, but where we have options of how to play it.
I think something that TW need is to add more of that "building a civilization" feeling. Making it your own place, choosing how is the goverment, the economy, the culture, and the army of your empire. And to have that doesn't necesary means to do it complicated or to completly screw history, there are easy but cool ways to make it. Right now, i play shogun 2 and i feel a only military but shallow game. And i know, its "total war", but i don't ask you to eliminate war, i ask you to add more options, more ways of playing or getting there.
English it's not my native language so i hope i made my point.

Keep the good work. Glad to see you are answering fans and encouraging discussions.

Top post. + rep.

Total War games are just that, Total War, however everyone plays games in their own way. One of my favourite campaigns was France in Med2 where I didn't choose to take evreything over but try to maintain the balance of power in Europe. I believe in the next game there should be more options for campaign policies, the welfare of your people, etc. Yes it is TW, and dont take anything from the war side of things, but a bit more depth for when you are at peace, or want to turtle a campaign.

[BlackDragon1032]

We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.



When we talk about the high cost of making games, we are not talking about distribution. That is a relatively small cost. We are talking about the cost of developing games. The fact that team sizes are bigger, the cost of voice overs, localisation, software licences and a multitude of other things. I'm not sure why you would think we were talking about distribution.

I'm currently playing S2 in prepartion of FoTS, but what I really miss is the depth of your cities RTW & MTW2.
In MTW2 you could choose if a city would be a castle or a city and if it would have a special building like a merchant guild. In RTW and MTW2 you had a difference in your cities (small,medium,large,huge) and every city was just unique. If it was up to me the tech tree for agents and generals would be erased, in MTW2 your agents and generals were unique and you noticed the loss of one (night fighther,siege expert).
The tech tree of the factions should have more direct effect in your campaign (economic,industrial or military), the techs should be more unique to each faction (again a refference to MTW2 England has Longbowmen and France doesn't).

After saying this I play the TW for years now and I saw the franchise grow, I know that Sega wants more profit (all companies want that) but please guys think about the fans who play the franchise for years and who expect something new and exciting.

[Fireright]

I wonder why those people calling for mind-numbing complexity and tedious micromanagement fests dont simply take their pocket calculators and spreadsheets and go play a different game series?? They can then relish the 'joy' of spending three weeks to prepare for a single battle or conquest.

No desire here to plonk about worrying about the optimal size of a battlefield bakery oven.

[Drtad]

I'm currently playing S2 in prepartion of FoTS, but what I really miss is the depth of your cities RTW & MTW2.
In MTW2 you could choose if a city would be a castle or a city and if it would have a special building like a merchant guild. In RTW and MTW2 you had a difference in your cities (small,medium,large,huge) and every city was just unique.

Until they all became huge monstrosities. Shogun 2 has more of a small/large mix than med 2 (and rome).

If it was up to me the tech tree for agents and generals would be erased, in MTW2 your agents and generals were unique and you noticed the loss of one (night fighther,siege expert).

I agree with this, personally. The system for generals/agents is ok now but I prefer the more randomness of med 2/rome characteristics.

the techs should be more unique to each faction (again a refference to MTW2 England has Longbowmen and France doesn't).

I'm sure that a game set in more than just one country will have different units for different factions...

I enjoy the more recent tw games very much but a return to more moddability would be nice. For the next engine there should be an effort to make the map moddable, at least the regions.

[MonkeyD]

We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.



When we talk about the high cost of making games, we are not talking about distribution. That is a relatively small cost. We are talking about the cost of developing games. The fact that team sizes are bigger, the cost of voice overs, localisation, software licences and a multitude of other things. I'm not sure why you would think we were talking about distribution.

Dude can I just apologize for the idiots who think the Total War series is meant to please only them. Not only that but also thank you on behave of the fans who enjoy your titles and are lucky enough to have people like you put a lot of time and effort into making these games.

We may complain and whine on little things but seriously don't stop making incredible games I beg you!

[ellwoodis]

Honestly, I auto-resolve most of the battles in this game because they take too long to load and leave. MTW2 loads in 20-30 seconds; it's 3-5 min for STW.

I think CA needs to add one or two perspectives: military realism and strategy. STW2 has neither beyond some cool graphics and units that function slightly better than NTW.

Military realism would allow the player to take the seat of the general and switch between over view and first person. That would be quite exciting, but too much for most gaming systems.

I would find a strategy game just as exciting. Being a fan of Civ 4 (and sort of V), I love the way that each city is customizable and how the regions can be developed to support different strategies, often based on the local resource. The scientific and cultural aspects allow for even greater customization. One can build military cities and cultural cities. One can conquer or focus on scientific breakthroughs while turtling.

STW2 restricts this ability greatly. I can't understand why I need to build a huge castle to add a monastery. Or why there are few methods to accelerate Chi arts. Or why science, military and cultural advancement are clumped into one aspect called "chi." We were heading down the right path in ETW with customization even if I only had 4 slots and now we're heading backwards. I want to do what I want with my cities and territories, not have to conform to a 1 slot or 2 slot rule.

[hellas1]

We have never aimed for the kind of depth you are now looking for now Hellas, though thanks to the joy of pc gaming there are games out there that cater to you. We have improved the gameplay of the Total War series with ever game we have released, and we aim to improve the complexity of the game but not in a way that adds too much micromanagement. This is a trend that will continue in future, keeping the basic nature of the game but reworking features and how parts of it work to improve the games as we go forwards. I hope we will be able to tempt you back with future titles.

Dear Jack,

It is not an issue of micromanagement but one of richness.......a quality of which TW is sorely lacking.
It seems obvious that the TW series are worked but not worked in enough....more depth sir.

Please pardon me but it was your key word "micromanagement" that won/lost engagements in ancient, medieval, renaissance, and pre-industrial/industrial times pre-WWI incidentally.

Consider the English long bow & stakes vs. an overwhelmingly greater numbered and more professional French army...

Consider Napoleon's campaign vs. Suvorov......Nappy 20's/30's vs. Suvorov late 80's/90 yrs. old!
Read that history....Suvarov was and still is an undefeated general. Hmmm......

Etc. etc......
hellas1.5

[|Kenshin|]

As with any company that is the only supplier of a good (tw) which has no competition that sells a homogenous game, you'll find that they are the price makers and we, the consumer are the price takers, they have the monopoly and decide what is created, how it is created etc, not to say that I've had any problem with the game, it's an interesting and exciting series or that they don't listen to the consumers wishes =)

[Strattios]

Sorry you feel that way. I had a bit of a similar feeling when Empire came out. Gun warfare just didn't do it for me (though the Organ gun loaded with shot is still epic). I was also reading a bunch of historical novels and the lack of realism was dragging me down. Then when Shogun 2 came out, it reminded me what TW is all about. Epic, period based warfare and strategy with excellent flavor and style.

While I do hope the next game sticks with the pre gun powder era, I just hope the keep the fun that the series is known for.

[leeho730]

I believe glorious achievement mode in the next TW series will bring some of the historical flavour back.... And I liked how the eras were divided... It was essentially three campaigns in one. And yeah, since gameplay in TW games since RTW always boiled down to how effectively players could steam-roll through enemy provinces, I believe issues such as lack of depth in logistical element would be more pronounced.

[leonn]

i havent bought a tw game since mtw2.i used to think it was because of the steam thing,but having seen the latest set of games in action i realised that the tw ai just isnt capable of depicting the strategy and tactics that it attempts.
if your digital armys are incapable of useing the battlefield tactics and formations in use at the time,then all they are doing is the medieval style of warfare and it matters not how you dress them up.

i dont think ive fallen 'out of love' as such with tw games,i still play mods for the non steam games every day as do friends of mine.but it seems to me there are now two types of tw game,one is all the new ones from empire onwards with steam,dlc's,limited mods and all the rest of it.these portray periods in history that they are not really capable of doing.they are very pretty but the battlefield tactics are still essentialy medieval.

the second type are the older non steam games with hundreds of fantastic mods whos creators,with no limits on their skills and imaginations exept those of the game engine still provide me with countless hours of play.

at first i felt a bit left out because i couldnt use the new games (steam,poor internet connectivity and all that).but having actually seen all the new games and played them a bit on friends machines and seeing how inaccurate the tactics are im not so worried about it.there are games that do the periods ca have tried much,much better than they do.

so i have the old tw games and the multitudes of mods for them and im very happy with them.so ca can carry on without me and many others and good luck to them,
if i want proper 17th,18th and 19thc warfare with firearms i am well catered for elsewhere.cheers