Page 11 of 56 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213141516171819202136 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 1112

Thread: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

  1. #201
    LestaT's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Campus Martius
    Posts
    3,862

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by caratacus View Post
    I must say, I think the announcement of both Total War "The Three Kingdoms" and "Thrones of Britannia" have really been handled badly by CA. We have two games one of which is to be released as early as Spring, which we up to now know very little about save the subject matter and videos. The video of Three Kingdoms was rushed out without any proper presentation, leading to a lot of speculation much of which is negative. In fact this speculation features in very little discussion at all. In previous releases, the TWC forum was full of discussion about the period of the game and what features should be included. I really do think that releasing a video without providing more detailed background information is pointless and counterproductive if you want to generate interest for a game.
    You probably have missed the bus not to realize that TWC is no longer the major target market for TW games.

  2. #202

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    I'd rather they keep everything authentic to the time period, but if they can't help themselves but portray the major characters/heroes with anachronistic armor and weapons, then at the very least I don't want to see any of that stuff for the regular soldiers. They should all be equipped with arms and armor that distinctly belong to the Eastern Han and Three Kingdoms era.
    Agree with you 100%.

    Hopefully CA will realize a lot of fans want an historical Total War above all and maybe tone down whatever anachronistic stuff they might of had if they did indeed based it off the trailer.

  3. #203
    Evan MF's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom, Cambridge
    Posts
    2,572

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.
    Last edited by Evan MF; January 14, 2018 at 09:27 PM.

  4. #204

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    We already know from the trailer that the game follows the novel events, so for some people it's already pretty much "fantasy" no matter how "realistic" the game is.


    ​Scoodlypooper Numero Uno

  5. #205

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    I feel like too many are acting like the Three Kingdom novel is fantasy like Lord of the Rings or Warhammer.

    Its not. It is more akin to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The game can be derived from the novel while still presenting an historically authentic TW game.

    As far as speculation goes, my best guess for how heroes will be handled is that it will not be like single person units stomping around the battlefield. They will be like normal units only with unique officer avatars that have special abilities and will probably be very difficult to defeat. So elite units in other words.

  6. #206
    Evan MF's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom, Cambridge
    Posts
    2,572

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by ggsimmonds View Post
    I feel like too many are acting like the Three Kingdom novel is fantasy like Lord of the Rings or Warhammer.

    Its not. It is more akin to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The game can be derived from the novel while still presenting an historically authentic TW game.

    As far as speculation goes, my best guess for how heroes will be handled is that it will not be like single person units stomping around the battlefield. They will be like normal units only with unique officer avatars that have special abilities and will probably be very difficult to defeat. So elite units in other words.
    It will more than likely by a re-use of the Warhammer 1-man general unit. They've just come off the back of - in their eyes - 2 successful games which feature the 1 man hero/monster unit paradigm and are heading into a new title based on a fiction novel, where they clearly telegraph the importance of heroes in the trailer, through the highly stylized appearance and elaborate fighting moves. It's staring us in the face. I would put good money on 1-man hero units.
    Last edited by Evan MF; January 15, 2018 at 01:04 AM.

  7. #207

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    It all depends on the setting. If you like the setting enough you'll just overlook things like ninja or gladiator women on the battlefield. When you don't like the setting every single thing becomes pronounced because you don't have the same sort of idealized context for it. I'm betting that most of the people getting angry over the "fantasy" have no previous knowledge of the Three Kingdoms era anyways.
    Last edited by ptoss1; January 15, 2018 at 01:10 AM.


    ​Scoodlypooper Numero Uno

  8. #208
    FrozenmenSS's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Silistra,Bulgaria
    Posts
    1,005

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    By the look of it CA knows a lot of people wont play Warhammer and that there will be lots of them also who wont like the Theme of the ''3 Kingdoms'' so my prediction is that the Saga DLCs will be with us in the next 2-3 years as a compromise.

  9. #209
    SturmChurro's Avatar Not Vault Boy
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,676

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan MF View Post
    CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.
    Not Paradox please! I don't want to pay a thousand dollars for 150 DLC expansions.

    Granted the DLC policy for Warhammer seems to mirror paradox's. Releasing a very basic vanilla and DLC after DLC to flesh it out.

  10. #210

    Default What Three Kingdoms should learn to be the best it can be



    Hey guys! This is my first video of this nature and i'd love to chat with people about the topics I bring up. I think I conflated Rome 2 a bit too much with Attila in section 1, so apologies to Rome 2 fans for being harsh there. I hope you guys enjoy this video and hope you agree with how I would like Three Kingdoms to be!

  11. #211
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Artifex

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    3,019

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan MF View Post
    CA doesn't cater to the likes of TWC anymore (if ever?), it caters to a mainstream PC gamer market and makes a lot of money doing so. TWCers should not conflate their dislike for the products CA have released in recent years with the success of the Total War titles (they do very well, year on year). Those of us who don't like the route the franchise has gone down have to face the fact that we have to look elsewhere for games that take historicity, plausibility and realism seriously. I have long given up hope with CA ever moving in the direction many of us have always wanted them to go down. In fact, Shogun 2 was a major foreshadowing of what kind of road they were going down, despite being an enjoyable and polished game to me, but for me Rome 2 was the true death of my fanboyism for the franchise. My hopes now lie on some indie or small developer signing on with a publisher like Paradox for example and delivering us the product that we crave, the product that Total War always projects in its advertisements but never truly delivers.
    This is an opinion a fully agree with.
    If you define "us" as "guys who care about history and would like to play games resembling / giving historical immersion / giving feel for history, then our path with CA have parted already.

    Two additional points:
    1) The mods for the older TW games should be added to the options of history fans (I mean RTW and M2TW). I think they're still great and some (especially Europa Barbarorum) are getting even better.
    2) I do play ATW-Age of Charlemagne happily but it's just a game with historical flavor, that's all. There're so many arcade and gamey things that even good mods cannot get away with (DeI for R2TW is good, but still cannot fix most of the issues). At the same time when I play Aleia Iaca Est or Europa Universalis, I have a feeling for history (with all simplifications a computer game requires). What I'd like is to have battles in the Total War style also in those games - or rather more simple but more realistic. In this sense I find the Universal General operational level to be the best. So maybe DarthVader as game producer will save us once again, as he did with the mods for the TW games?

    Quote Originally Posted by SturmChurro View Post
    Not Paradox please! I don't want to pay a thousand dollars for 150 DLC expansions.
    Granted the DLC policy for Warhammer seems to mirror paradox's. Releasing a very basic vanilla and DLC after DLC to flesh it out.
    Producers have to finance themselves somehow. Only the modders don charge you - and not all of them.
    I think CA policy will be to sell again the same product for full price with some minor changes. Take Thrones of Britannia: this will be a DLC for Attila, but you'll buy it standalone. It means: you'll buy the engine of Attila again plus some add-ons (map, slightly modified units, new scenario) for a price of a new game (it will be advertised as a "new game"). This is going to be exactly the same in terms of money with the Paradox way of charging you for the DLCs. Or maybe rather worse - you still get free upadates for your basic Europa Universalis when a DLC comes. With the Total War games you wouldn't.
    JoC
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; January 15, 2018 at 04:33 AM.
    For those who want to play a historical mod in a medieval setting:
    try the Stainless Steel Historical Improvement Project,
    or the Broken Crescent + Buff and Shine (if you'd like to play in Levant).
    ..........................................................................................................................................................................
    Reviews of the mods: SSHIP (2018), Wrath of the Norsemen (2018), Broken Crescent (2018).
    Thrones of Britannia: review, opinion on the battles, ideas for modding.
    Minimods included in the SSHIP: Generals Traits, Provincial Titles, Crowns.
    Short guides for the SSHIP: population growth, forts and watchtowers.
    Pros and cons of having Merchants in an M2TW mod.
    Home rules for playing a game without exploiting the M2TW engine deficiencies.
    Dominant strategy in Attila TW and Rome 2 TW: “Sniping groups of armies”.

  12. #212
    Anna_Gein's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    3,622

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    I just realized, this Romance of Three Kingdoms last about a generation (60 years). So how is it different from TW Saga ?

  13. #213

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Setekh View Post
    This is just hilarious... Reminds me of this...
    Thank you. Coming from you, this is a compliment.

    Quote Originally Posted by EmperorBatman999 View Post
    I think it’s inevitable this game will have fantasy elements inspired by Romance. And for marketing purposes, it would only be natural to play into the mythology of the story, as that’s the part most people know.

    It’s inevitable that we will see mythology play a part. We can likely expect the game to use a combination of the novel and straight historiography as sources and stylistic inspiration.
    But here's the problem with that: if the game has fantasy elements as you say, then it's a fantasy game by definition. I have no problem with CA making a fantasy game. But they are advertising this as a historical title. Promising a historical title and delivering a fantasy title, that's what I have a problem with.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptoss1 View Post
    Why are people so upset? Shogun 2 had ninjas and geisha. Rome 2 has flaming pigs and incendiary gates. It's not like Total War has ever been anywhere historical. I'm super psyched for this.
    I haven't really seen anyone upset here. It seems that most of the people who are disappointed with this announcement were just expecting a gunpowder era game, hence their disappointment.

    Shogun 2 had ninja and geisha as agents, yeah. So what?

    No, Rome 2 doesn't have flaming pigs. It doesn't have incendiary gates either. It has gates that pour boiling oil, which actually happened historically.

    Having historical inaccuracies is one thing (which can be fixed by mods anyway), but having magic weapons (or fictional weapon designs) and fictional events in a title which is advertised as a historical one is a completely different thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by NostalgiaFan View Post
    Yeah so what? It's just an oath. If CA want to take some fictional elements that don't seem too unrealistic in the game I am fine with that. It does not tell me they are going full fantasy when most likely they are only taking some popular elements from the novels without going to far into the ridiculous territory.
    You completely missed my point. The oath is a fictional event from a fantasy novel. An event that never happened historically and has no place in a historical game. CA is advertising this as a historical title, so by definition this means no fictional events or elements should be included in this game. If they do include fictional elements or events, then this isn't a historical game, but a historical fiction game, in which case their advertising is lying to us. And by the way their advertising is definitely lying to us, as they have posted a description in their official forum that clearly states this is the next main historical title of the TW franchise but at the same time their trailer shows us a version which is historical fiction at best or fantasy at worst. They can't be both true, one of the two is lying. Time will tell which one.

    Your last sentence here clearly tells me that some people have really misunderstood what I'm saying, hence their reaction. I never said they're going full fantasy. In fact I said the exact opposite, that they'll most likely remove the very obvious magic that is included in the fantasy novel. What I said is that they're going for the fantasy version, meaning that they will portray the game with the general direction and aesthetics of the romance version and not of the records version. Check out my post in page 9 and you'll see. Again, the problem with them going for the romance version is that they promise a historical title but will deliver a historical fiction title at best.

    Oh wow you mean CA is making anachronistic choices with some weapons like they have in previous total wars as recently as with Attila? Does not convince me they are going full fantasy when we see the rest of the troops have what we see to be historically authentic weapons and uniforms. Most likely the Heroes are getting most of the fictional stuff while the rest of the of the units are still trying to be authentic.
    This is not just a weapon out of its era, this is a fantasy weapon, a magic weapon made from a dragon's body. It has no place in a historical game. Let's hope they use just the design and not the magical elements as well.

    Yes, they have made historically inaccurate mistakes in past titles too. So what? Does that somehow gives them a free pass to keep messing up just because they've already been messing up in the past? This doesn't make sense.

    Once again, I never said they're going full fantasy. We have to wait for more info on the actual gameplay and features to know for that. Their trailer however strongly suggests that they're going at the very least for historical fiction.

    And as I already said, fictional stuff has no place in a historical game. If the game has fictional stuff then it's by definition not a historical game.

    Yeah yeah we already know they are taking some fictional elements what about it? Nothing in there besides the battle itself being fictional looked like it was going full fantasy. All we see is Lu Bu taking down several unnamed soldiers which is no more unrealistic then my Charlemagne example.
    Oh boy, same arguement over and over. Once again, a game with fictional elements is not a historical game. I have no problem with CA making a historical fiction game, as long as they're advertising it as such. But that's not what they're doing. They're telling us one thing and then showing us another.

    The magic weapons did, even though I hope they're just using the designs. And once again, I never said they're going full fantasy.

    Come on man, same invalid arguments over and over, it's getting really tiresome. No, thats not all we saw. We saw fictional events and reference to magic weapons from a fantasy novel. We also saw an ahistorical portrayal of battle, with strong resemblance of warhammer's battle mechanics concerning characters. Total War battles are supposed to be unit based, not character based. Of course this could just be the trailer and not the actual game, in fact I hope it is.

    And I can say based on what I have seen both from the trailer and your posts is that people are getting way too ahead of themselves because nothing has given me concrete evidence that we are going the fantasy rout and instead it is more incorporating some fictional elements with the historical instead.

    I'll wait for more info before I say whether this title is just going to the rout of Shogun 2 or Warhammer.
    I gave you concrete evidence that they're going for the fantasy version, which you actually agree with, but you keep arguing with me because you keep misinterpreting what I said. We're saying the same thing with different words. You say they're incorporating some fictional elements from the novel in the game, I say they're going for the fantasy version (refering to the romance). Bottom line is we're both saying they're going for the romance version, not for the records version. We actually agree.

    And once more, if it has fictional elements it's not a historical game.

    I predict a mix of both with stronger emphasis on warhammer's direction, but without the obvious magic of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptoss1 View Post
    We already know from the trailer that the game follows the novel events, so for some people it's already pretty much "fantasy" no matter how "realistic" the game is.
    Well, the novel is fantasy. It has magicians summoning the wind or locusts, magic weapons, flying horses, etc. As for the game itself, I hope it'll be realistic. The trailer however is anything but, especially at the end when Lu Bu repeatedly defies the laws of physics.

    Quote Originally Posted by ggsimmonds View Post
    I feel like too many are acting like the Three Kingdom novel is fantasy like Lord of the Rings or Warhammer.

    Its not. It is more akin to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar.
    It is fantasy. And I just explained why right above. Since it has magic, it's fantasy.

    The game can be derived from the novel while still presenting an historically authentic TW game.
    That's like saying that a game about the second Persian invasion in Hellas can be derived from the movie 300 while still presenting a historically authentic TW game. No, it really can't.

    As far as speculation goes, my best guess for how heroes will be handled is that it will not be like single person units stomping around the battlefield. They will be like normal units only with unique officer avatars that have special abilities and will probably be very difficult to defeat. So elite units in other words.
    I hope it is like that. The trailer and their talk about all this emphasis on champions, characters etc. however indicate otherwise. We'll see.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptoss1 View Post
    It all depends on the setting. If you like the setting enough you'll just overlook things like ninja or gladiator women on the battlefield. When you don't like the setting every single thing becomes pronounced because you don't have the same sort of idealized context for it. I'm betting that most of the people getting angry over the "fantasy" have no previous knowledge of the Three Kingdoms era anyways.
    For me it works the exact opposite way: the more I like a setting the less I overlook things. In a setting I don't really care about, I'm certainly much more willing and likely to overlook things and play the game just for fun.

    Great examples:
    Rome 2: I'm absolutely in love with the setting, so even the smallest inaccuracy or gameplay flaw hits me like a brick in the face. I'm not willing at all to overlook things.
    Shogun 2: I don't really care about the setting, so I couldn't care less about inaccuraces and I was much more willing to overlook minor gameplay flaws. I just played it for fun when I did.
    Last edited by perifanosEllinas; January 15, 2018 at 05:00 AM.

  14. #214

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Every single Total War game in existence has fictional elements...
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  15. #215

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Anna_Gein View Post
    I just realized, this Romance of Three Kingdoms last about a generation (60 years). So how is it different from TW Saga ?
    The game starts from 190CE, if what the description is to go by. The Three Kingdoms period ends in 280, so about 90 years? If we go by 25 years per generation, that's almost 3 1/2?
    「戦場廻り、運命決まり、生死しらない」

  16. #216
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Moderation Overseer Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    4,890

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Anna_Gein View Post
    I just realized, this Romance of Three Kingdoms last about a generation (60 years). So how is it different from TW Saga ?
    I doubt time will change in Three Kingdoms. Seasons definitely yes, Chinese landscape under different colours would be too great an opportunity for marketing to miss, but it would be weird if in a game seemingly so much structured around some heroic figures, the protagonists would die of old age, to be replaced by a generic warlord. Regarding the fantasy controversy, I suspect that fears of magical weapons and abilities are exaggerated, but we should probably expect some elements of the extremely profitable Warhammer games to be imported. Probably, that means unkillable faction leaders (a feature since Napoleon, where getting decapitated by a cannonball would only result into to a short but restful convalescent leave in the capital), with extreme efficiency in martial arts (including some impressive animations). Sorcery of any sort would probably too much, though, although even these unrealistic characteristics and the time already passed since 2015 could lead to an alienation between CA and part of the most "hardcore" customers. Uniforms and equipment will also, I suspect, be less historically accurate than the last games at least since the Egyptians of Rome I, because not many are familiarised with these details of Chinese history, so a Song hat for a Han warrior can be more easily tolerated than a turban for a Carthaginian. I don't care much about the debate about "authenticity' (to use CA's slightly obfuscating vocabulary), but I will be disappointed, if my fears about the invincibility of generals and the absence of time progress are confirmed.

  17. #217
    Huberto's Avatar Praepositus
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,265

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Settra View Post
    Let me paraphrase Arch Warhammer here. If this game is indeed intended to be a huge success on the practically infinite Chinese market then it can only be fantasy. China has banned games for a lot less than what a historical three kingdoms game would present. Also the heroes, the units, everything is taken straight out of the romance.

    Not to mention that Liu Bei is a literal god in China and presenting even the extremely idealized version of him we have in most historical records would lead to people screaming bloody murder.


    Not that a game based on the romance would be a bad thing. Oh no no no no no. At leas this way you get unit diversity and intersting characters. Historically three kingdoms china had an even lower unit diversity than sengoku jidai japan. Imagine playing an entire campaign with only spear ashigaru and ashigaru bowmen, and only ever facing those two units.
    A design choice for three kingdoms that would promote unit diversity at the expense of historical authenticity would be an attempt to have a game built around “cool units,” a sort of stealth Warhammer set in China so hopefully no one notices. This would be completely fraudulent as a historical game.

    TW historical games should be built around available historical information about an era’s warfare, logistics, politics, diplomacy, trade and econ to build an entertaining atmosphere of what the period was like - and that’s what hooks us and keeps me playing.

    As you say, you propose a fantasy title, not historical. Now I suppose CA could develop a fantasy title rooted in historically-themed fiction in order to bring a new genre to Total War - but that’s in essence what all fantasy and Sci-fi titles already are. so nothing new there. This is being marketed as a historical title and I'd like to learn about the collapse of the Han Dynasty in historical China. If this game ends up based on Romance, I'd imagine there will be hell to pay with the historical side of the fan base. I’d go as far to say it will sever TW’s longstanding connection to history fans.

    Now perhaps that doesn’t matter, commercially or even as a question of good game design. Perhaps there are newer fans that don't care to imagine history as it was, and really prefer to play TW Mythology, to get cool units and sick martial arts animations (but that sounds more like the Warhammer fantasy crowd to me). Perhaps it’s more important to Sega to tap a new market and they are nervous, but then why not do first trailer in Chinese then with English subtitles?

    Promising a new major historical game for two years running and then bringing TW: Romance of the Three Kingdoms out will prove to be extremely controversial imo. It will drive many people away from the franchise. I know I’ll drop it like a stone - not out of anger but boredom.
    Last edited by Huberto; January 15, 2018 at 03:34 PM.

  18. #218
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    22,268

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Guaranteed that this will just be a map of China. They probably won't have the Xinjiang city-states, nor the steppe, nor anything in Indochina, heck it probably won't even have Korea.

    The game also won't have anything meaningful in the way of approaching the economic factors of the period. Researching Agro-Military colonies on some tech tree will be enough instead of actually being able to create fortified colonies to increase taxation of devastated areas as well as to increase the number of men you can call up for military service.

    There will probably be 2 cities per province instead of the more complex county system which China actually used. In addition to that historical fortresses will probably be non-existent, places such as Xiaoting, Hefei or Xiangyang.

    Cao Cao will not have the stats or bonuses which he deserves. Historically Cao Cao was a cavalry general who commanded the cavalry forces in the campaigns of Huangfu Song and Zhu Jun. Instead I suspect that someone else like Lu Bu or Gongsun Zan (the White Riders) will have the emphasis on cavalry. This would be regardless of the fact that Lu Bu was actually defeated in a cavalry battle by Cao Cao. However in addition to this Cao Cao was also an infantry general, aside from that specializing in planning operations and strategy, logistics and using his administrative abilities in the form of counter insurgency. For instance he was capable of pacifying the city of Jinan during the Yellow Turban Revolt, getting the various tribes of the north to submit to his rule, creating the Tuntian system (agro-military colonies), getting the Yellow Turbans in Qing Province to join his army and generally being able to avoid peasant revolts.

    They will likely give us the option of clicking the raid button, instead of actually raiding.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  19. #219
    craziii's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,247

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by ptoss1 View Post
    It all depends on the setting. If you like the setting enough you'll just overlook things like ninja or gladiator women on the battlefield. When you don't like the setting every single thing becomes pronounced because you don't have the same sort of idealized context for it. I'm betting that most of the people getting angry over the "fantasy" have no previous knowledge of the Three Kingdoms era anyways.
    spot on bro. imo, alot of the msm hate leaks into every aspect of western lives. which is why I think CA is brave to try this.
    Last edited by lolIsuck; January 15, 2018 at 05:21 PM. Reason: off-topic
    fear is helluva drug
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    “The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. "Fear," he used to say, "fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe." That blew me away. "Turn on the TV," he'd say. "What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products." freakin' A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.” WWZ

    Have you had your daily dose of fear yet? craziii
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  20. #220
    Anna_Gein's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    3,622

    Default Re: New Historical total war era - Total War: Three Kingdoms!

    Quote Originally Posted by Eien View Post
    The game starts from 190CE, if what the description is to go by. The Three Kingdoms period ends in 280, so about 90 years? If we go by 25 years per generation, that's almost 3 1/2?
    Seems I got the chronology wrong.

    However the description hints we only play the first generation of warlords.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    The year is 190CE. China is in turmoil.

    The Han Dynasty crumbles before the child-emperor. He is but a figurehead; a mere puppet for the tyrant warlord Dong Zhuo. It is a brutal and oppressive regime, and as Dong Zhuo’s power grows, the empire slips further into the cauldron of anarchy.

    But hope yet blossoms.

    Three heroes, sworn to brotherhood in the face of tyranny, rally support for the trials ahead. Scenting opportunity, warlords from China’s great families follow suit, forming a fragile coalition in a bid to challenge Dong Zhuo’s remorseless rule. Will they triumph against the tyrant, or will personal ambition shatter their already crumbling alliance and drive them to supremacy?

    The crucible fizzes. Allegiances shift. The fires of conflict stoke opportunity. Only one thing is certain: the very future of China will be shaped by its champions.


    I guess the game will end around 220 AD (when Cao Cao and Liu Bei died). I imagine they will be both playable. I do not know who could be the third legendary lord. I bet Dong Zhuo will be the pre-order DLC.

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    I doubt time will change in Three Kingdoms. Seasons definitely yes, Chinese landscape under different colours would be too great an opportunity for marketing to miss, but it would be weird if in a game seemingly so much structured around some heroic figures, the protagonists would die of old age, to be replaced by a generic warlord. Regarding the fantasy controversy, I suspect that fears of magical weapons and abilities are exaggerated, but we should probably expect some elements of the extremely profitable Warhammer games to be imported. Probably, that means unkillable faction leaders (a feature since Napoleon, where getting decapitated by a cannonball would only result into to a short but restful convalescent leave in the capital), with extreme efficiency in martial arts (including some impressive animations). Sorcery of any sort would probably too much, though, although even these unrealistic characteristics and the time already passed since 2015 could lead to an alienation between CA and part of the most "hardcore" customers. Uniforms and equipment will also, I suspect, be less historically accurate than the last games at least since the Egyptians of Rome I, because not many are familiarised with these details of Chinese history, so a Song hat for a Han warrior can be more easily tolerated than a turban for a Carthaginian. I don't care much about the debate about "authenticity' (to use CA's slightly obfuscating vocabulary), but I will be disappointed, if my fears about the invincibility of generals and the absence of time progress are confirmed.
    Good remarks. I am sure the three legendary lords will be unkillable. As you said it is hardly a new feature anyway. I expect them to work like TW Warhammer heroes on the battlefield rather than have their bodyguard unit with them. I expect champions like agents will also join battles as one man unit.

    Your suggestion about no time progression is interesting. I did not thought CA could go that far. At the same time this is exactly what CA did with Warhammer and it did not cause outcry afaik.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •