Going Realtime

**El Chupanibre** · July 02, 2012, 01:17 PM

Am I alone that for Empire and Napoeleon I really wished the campaigns had been real time rather than turn based?

Maybe for Rome II?? I think you would have far more realistic army movement and strategy of trying to get your army to an advantageous terrain before the enemy army intercepts you, better depiction of persuing fleeing armies (I can't tell you how frustrated I get in Empire chasing around these tiny remnant armies that like burning down all my farms during their turn and I just have to sit there and like it) and better depiction of changing seasons.

**Dynamo11** · July 02, 2012, 01:20 PM

Real time would be absolutely chaotic in a series like Total War. Also the whole Total War thing is realtime battles and turn based campaign

**SonOfCrusader76** · July 02, 2012, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by El Chupanibre

Am I alone that for Empire and Napoeleon I really wished the campaigns had been real time rather than turn based?

Maybe for Rome II?? I think you would have far more realistic army movement and strategy of trying to get your army to an advantageous terrain before the enemy army intercepts you, better depiction of persuing fleeing armies (I can't tell you how frustrated I get in Empire chasing around these tiny remnant armies that like burning down all my farms during their turn and I just have to sit there and like it) and better depiction of changing seasons.

Absolutely no! How the hell would a real time campaign work??

**hazdude222** · July 02, 2012, 01:22 PM

I'm afraid you're not going to get too much support for this. It's not going to happen either.

**El Chupanibre** · July 02, 2012, 01:24 PM

I dunno, other games seemed to pull it off quite well: all the Paradox games and Knights of Honor

**Tongera** · July 02, 2012, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by El Chupanibre

I dunno, other games seemed to pull it off quite well: all the Paradox games and Knights of Honor

Paradox games have you moving through provinces. They don't let the armies walk on the map.

**El Chupanibre** · July 02, 2012, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Tongera

Paradox games have you moving through provinces. They don't let the armies walk on the map.

What was actually my biggest disappointment with those games and why I stopped playing them. Knights of Honor is a much better example. Armies march around the map in real time and you have a choice to pause the game and control a battle personally or let the computer autoresolve.

**fightermedic** · September 08, 2012, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by El Chupanibre

What was actually my biggest disappointment with those games and why I stopped playing them. Knights of Honor is a much better example. Armies march around the map in real time and you have a choice to pause the game and control a battle personally or let the computer autoresolve.

i so would like to have knights of honors real time system for total war - it will never happen though

**Prof** · July 02, 2012, 01:28 PM

Empire at war had a realtime campaign...and it really kept me busy...I like it the way it is now...with the turn based campaign, where I can take all the time I want to make my decisions.

**Sir Walter** · July 02, 2012, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by Prof

Empire at war had a realtime campaign...and it really kept me busy...I like it the way it is now...with the turn based campaign, where I can take all the time I want to make my decisions.

How about a challenge?

Real-time campaign would be much better - you can zoom in and alter the speed to reflect what you're doing - this will enable better pre-battle strategy which often decided battles as armies were separated from their supplies or led into ambushes by scouts, etc. Also, the tile system always struck me as too simplistic. This would offer a much greater challenge and allow more precise timings than every six months. All good mods have offered more turns per year - this is just a logical continuation of the progress, smoothing out the campaign until it is literally seamless, as real life is. We all want to feel like we're actual ancient generals really.

**MasterBigAb** · July 02, 2012, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Sir Walter

How about a challenge?

Real-time campaign would be much better - you can zoom in and alter the speed to reflect what you're doing - this will enable better pre-battle strategy which often decided battles as armies were separated from their supplies or led into ambushes by scouts, etc. Also, the tile system always struck me as too simplistic. This would offer a much greater challenge and allow more precise timings than every six months. All good mods have offered more turns per year - this is just a logical continuation of the progress, smoothing out the campaign until it is literally seamless, as real life is. We all want to feel like we're actual ancient generals really.

Mhmm to be honest, when thinking closer about it....while I was against it before, I start to like the idea more and more

**Humble Warrior** · July 02, 2012, 02:39 PM

Real time would be a huge mistake and cater only to the finger twitch fantasy crowd. It would also destroy authentic, historical based strategy such as written about in favour of he who can mass the most amount of whatever and throw them at the other person as fast as possible. Bang would go any kind of set piece battles where two huge armies face eachother, size each other up... and then attack- Like in the real thing.

I have tried games that went from classic turn-based to realt-ime and they destroyed it. I never returned to any of them.

**Timdog** · July 02, 2012, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Prof

Empire at war had a realtime campaign...and it really kept me busy...I like it the way it is now...with the turn based campaign, where I can take all the time I want to make my decisions.

Sins of a Solar Empire is like this as well. But EVERYTHING is real-time, you can zoom in from the big map to a battle to command but everything else is still moving around you. while it is a cool concept and I like the game, it gets chaotic and a bit too intense at times. It feels like a workout trying to play that game. I like that in TW I get breaks from the big action and have time to plan my moves. Neither style is necessarily "better" but I don't want TW turning into Sins.

**Gorhaax** · July 02, 2012, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by El Chupanibre

I dunno, other games seemed to pull it off quite well: all the Paradox games and Knights of Honor

I would love another Knights of Honor game

**Gorhaax** · July 02, 2012, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by El Chupanibre

I dunno, other games seemed to pull it off quite well: all the Paradox games and Knights of Honor

I would love another Knights of Honor game, just with Total war battles, but not as a total war game

**atheniandp** · July 02, 2012, 01:26 PM

I have long been an advocate for real time campaigns since Medieval 2. It is a vastly superior system in which months, days and even hours are taken into significance. Realistic movement, training, etc are but a few advantages. Even better, the human first turn advantage is eliminated so no faction has a head start. Multiplayer campaigns will also be more feasible with this system, especially if they can be sped up.

EDIT:

The real time campaign system worked very well in the Braveheart PC game. It is very similar to Total War, moreso than the Paradox games. Check out this video and remember this is 1999 game:

**RazorbackII** · July 02, 2012, 01:27 PM

I can see the idea in my head, but it would have create a huge array of problems many of which have already been mentioned on several over threads. I must prefer how the campaign is currently.