Saga is not necessary important term. So far we have three examples of Sagas:
FotS: 10 factions in two major camps, endgame ability to declare independence else fight against champion of opposite site
ToB: 10 factions in 5 culture groups, endgame invasion of Normans/Vikings
Troy: FAQ told us that there will be 8 factions/characters probably on release (
https://www.totalwar.com/blog/a-tota...saga-troy-faq/ ), again two main camps as Greeks vs Troy, plus there might be DLCs with more characters..anyway I expect game to have two parts..in first you will try to unite your side, then in second defeat enemy...
So I agree that ACW with two major sides is not so different to FotS or even Troy. But in those two the actual sides are not well established states/rigid bodies. In both those games you basically risen in competition to rally others behind you. Like the biggest baddest tough dog in room.
Now compare it to ACW. I´m sorry but there was any serious competition between states on their own side? Like imagine states of South/North compete who is the champion of cause and will lead all forces into battle...It would require some good diplomacy system while keeping just two very extreme position. There is nothing like middle ground which is usual state till endgame in majority of TWs.
Plus another point is conquered/occupied territory. I totally agree with you there is no need to depict whole USA landmass as the action was not at all places but on other hands that would somehow limit us to historical borders. Total Wars are games of what ifs, so we should have opportunity to win by various approaches. But there is no neutral ground to gain. Either it is North or South territory which means you will start snowballing from very start of game...
pDEK4gJBKW0[/youtube]
And as last point. Endgame. Usual games has progress, keep expanding, research technologies, manage endgame. But here? If endgame stars with conquering certain number of regions, you are already way past snowballing point. Endgame here would be artificial number of armies appearing on opposite side with simple goal to withstand that.
But okey. Not to be so pesimistic, i can imagine like two scenario. What if instead of managing whole side, you will pick just single state. For whole game you will be generally locked just to manage that one state, your arm forces and opperate as part of greater plan. Problem is that this will require superb AI to command whole structure of your side, giving you commands, cooperation with multiple AI generals etc. It is again quite far from TW format...
Honestly I would either pick American War for Independence as scenario or keep this as expansion/DLC/faction pack for possible TW: Victoria, this would be my second option. Basically imagine Empire 2, set about 1850-1900ish? (I would love to start with Napoleon, but starting after him,why not..) Maybe ending with Russo-Japanese War. For that faction/chapter packs imagine conflicts like Franco-Prussian War, Crimean War, Russo-Japanese War, American Civil War, Meiji restoration. Those would expand factions, rosters of particular factions.