Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia

[Commissar Caligula_]

On Total War Access there is a huge 10851x3766 panorama of a Thrones of Britannia settlement battle.
Beware, for the file size is 50mb, here's a link to it though.

[Holger Danske]

My only "major" gripe is that CA hasn't considered that 800AD Britian looked geographically different from today - It would be a very nice touch to have. Also, If I buy it I would eventually want to play as the Norwegian/Danish. Hopefully and expansion is planned that will include the lands of Denmark/Norway/Normandy.

https://thehistoryofengland.co.uk/wp...8be92a970c.png

Tbh, I'd rather have them make a 30-year-warish pike and musket game or make an entirely new game engine that actually works for melee based strategy games.

[PikeStance]

On Total War Access there is a huge 10851x3766 panorama of a Thrones of Britannia settlement battle.
Beware, for the file size is 50mb, here's a link to it though.

I do not want to be ugly, but thus far all three have been a massive disappointment.
Day one is several monotone history lessons spoken with all of the enthusiasm of an uninspired tenured professor.
Day two is the shared photo above.
Day three,... I have no idea what it is. It looks like frosty's arms being regenerated.

[Commissar Caligula_]

I do not want to be ugly, but thus far all three have been a massive disappointment.
Day one is several monotone history lessons spoken with all of the enthusiasm of an uninspired tenured professor.
Day two is the shared photo above.
Day three,... I have no idea what it is. It looks like frosty's arms being regenerated.

Thats what you find to be a massive disappointment? I'm disappointed with the fact that from that screenshot Thrones of Britannia looks the exact same as Total War Attila. I knew the game was going to use Attila's engine, but I'd hoped they'd at least make 100% custom assets like Fall of the Samurai had vs Shogun 2.

I know absolutely nothing about any of the 4 time periods I'm about to mention, but surely the uniforms/buildings/ships/weaponry/armour changed just as much between 395 (Attila) and 878-1066 (Thrones of Britannia) as they did between the 16th century (Shogun 2) and the mid 19th century (Fall of the Samurai)?

[PikeStance]

Yeah,... the narration sounded like he was reading from the book, the tree limbs showed nothing and that picture was so far away I am amazed you got anything out of it. They gave very limited effort in promoting the new game. The minimalist approach is what is disappointing. I prefer the way Paradox does things. They really tease the game/ DLC, while CA tries to make you "guess." If you want to get me excited, then get me excited.

[Commissar Caligula_]

Yeah,... the narration sounded like he was reading from the book, the tree limbs showed nothing and that picture was so far away I am amazed you got anything out of it. They gave very limited effort in promoting the new game. The minimalist approach is what is disappointing. I prefer the way Paradox does things. They really tease the game/ DLC, while CA tries to make you "guess." If you want to get me excited, then get me excited.

Its a massive panorama, so I just zoomed in heaps. The only "new" stuff I saw was some Celtic shields from Rome 2.
Day 4 of Christmas has 4 wallpapers of 4 Tomb King Legendary Lords that look ok-ish.
I think the "tree limbs" was meant to be Asian caligraphy, so hinting at Shogun 2 DLC, Japan/China for Total War Arena or Total War: China.

[Dude with the Food]

Has it even been said anywhere that the screenshot isn't from Attila and not ToB? I might have missed something but it looks like a scene straight out of Attila.

[Commissar Caligula_]

Has it even been said anywhere that the screenshot isn't from Attila and not ToB? I might have missed something but it looks like a scene straight out of Attila.

The image title itself, straight from Total War Access, is "Thrones of Britannia Panoramic".

[Dude with the Food]

Fair enough, I missed something.

[T-Duke]

Same engine, so:

1) black dots/ants armies
2) blobbing warfare

Not interested.

[zoner16]

Thats what you find to be a massive disappointment? I'm disappointed with the fact that from that screenshot Thrones of Britannia looks the exact same as Total War Attila. I knew the game was going to use Attila's engine, but I'd hoped they'd at least make 100% custom assets like Fall of the Samurai had vs Shogun 2.

I know absolutely nothing about any of the 4 time periods I'm about to mention, but surely the uniforms/buildings/ships/weaponry/armour changed just as much between 395 (Attila) and 878-1066 (Thrones of Britannia) as they did between the 16th century (Shogun 2) and the mid 19th century (Fall of the Samurai)?

They seemed like AoC models (hard to tell due to distance).

From what I do know about the time period, there wasn't a major shift in styles among the lower classes between the end of Anglo-Saxon migration and the start of age of the Vikings. Armor and weaponry began to change after the Viking settlement, due to intermingling and viking trade, but before then, at most the changes were minor.

So basically, tier one troops should look very similar to Age of Charlemagne, but the upgrade tiers should bring them further and further away from that model as time goes on. More axes and helmets courtesy of Viking influence, and better armor as Saxon freemen started investing in personal defense.

Things really shifted with the Norman invasion, but that's outside the scope of this game.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

They said that the Saga games will be heavily invested in, quote "Deep character development".

If that is done well, and is interesting then the graphics of Attila aren't bad to be honest, stylistically they are great but the engine needs optimization for sure.

Then again this whole "deep character development" could be just a Warhammer style skill tree for your "legendary lords" so I don't know what to think at this point.

[Anna_Gein]

For now the game looks like a robbery.

[NorseThing]

For now the game looks like a robbery.

Since nobody has seen the game and we do not even know the pricing, perhaps yours judgment is a bit premature. Be a fan and not the Debbie Downer of SNL reputation.

[Anna_Gein]

Since nobody has seen the game and we do not even know the pricing, perhaps yours judgment is a bit premature. Be a fan and not the Debbie Downer of SNL reputation.

Which is why I said for now.

I do not understand what you mean by Debbie Downer of SNL reputation. In any case the information we have for now are not exciting. Far from it. For instance siege and civic management seem as barebone as it can get.

Watch this video if you have the time and check the forum thread as well as the youtube comments (for once interesting).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

CA communicated a little bit about combat style of different factions. Frankly I am too old to fall for such deja vu.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Irish factions will be the usual terrible roster with "an emphasize on skirmish". Others will be usual factions with the usual play styles. Aside from disappointing announcements CA's communication seems in difficulty to project Saga : Thrones of Britannia as a full game.

The fact people are still wondering what price will be for an undoubtedly stand alone title is worrisome imo.

They said that the Saga games will be heavily invested in, quote "Deep character development".

If that is done well, and is interesting then the graphics of Attila aren't bad to be honest, stylistically they are great but the engine needs optimization for sure.

Then again this whole "deep character development" could be just a Warhammer style skill tree for your "legendary lords" so I don't know what to think at this point.

Rome II was aggressively marketed with an emphasize on "personal drama" and "the human face of total war". We all know how it turned to be.

[Commissar Caligula_]

The first video posted by Anna_Gein is meant to be this video, at the 3:55 mark.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

Since nobody has seen the game and we do not even know the pricing, perhaps yours judgment is a bit premature. Be a fan and not the Debbie Downer of SNL reputation.

I'd prefer to be pragmatic and look at previous failures - and hope they've learned from them - than 'be a fan' and revel in optimism. Besides my thoughts on any sort of hype, based on announcements so far - which are obviously not clearly indicative of what the final game will be, which is another thing I'm concerned about from CA - my fear is that it will simply be an inferior entry. Shogun 2 scale, if not less, and quite possibly with much less polish. Or, as I'm getting the feeling of, it will turn out like a somewhat bigger Britannia campaign from Medieval 2 in scale and gameplay minus the grand campaign, the rest of the factions, and without the sheer scale of modability that the prior entry had.

Rome 2 strove for too much. This doesn't seem to be reaching far enough. We'll have to see what actually happens, but I personally lean towards 'downer'.

[NorseThing]

Anna_Gein -- your points are well taken. Don't take the 'Downer' personally. No offense was meant by my post.

I am also concerned and wondering how this can be different from the expected and past offerings.

[PikeStance]

The fact people are still wondering what price will be for an undoubtedly stand alone title is worrisome imo.
Rome II was aggressively marketed with an emphasize on "personal drama" and "the human face of total war". We all know how it turned to be.

I wouldn't expect the pricing to be much different relative to the price of past games. It doesn't appear the development of the game is any less than past titles. Therefore, I would expect the price to be 75% to 100% past prices. Keep in mind, just because the geography is smaller doesn't mean level of development is lower.

Internal faction gameplay is really more like Paradox. I am not sure that is CA's forte. Perhaps our expectations were too high given what other publishers had produced. Personally, the attraction of Total War is the tactical battles. I would had preferred that they develop that part of the game and do a lot less campaign stuff.

[Used2BRoz]

Having watched the video discussing sieges I'm puzzled why there is any inclusion of artillery in the game (ie ballistae, onagers etc.)
From what I've read there seems to be no evidence that it was employed in Britain during the time period the game is intended to cover.

Also the voice-over was complaining about the lack of an ability to upgrade from wooden defences to stone walls.
Again from what I've read whilst old Roman fortifications were indeed used, and repaired where possible, there were no new build stone defences erected in this time period.
The labour force, skilled workers and the sheer time it would take to build a full circuit wall to defend settlements was beyond what any of the factions would be able to assemble.
And as nobody was using artillery, a solid pallisade surmounting a rampart and ditch would be sufficient to deter most casual attackers.