Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

  1. #1

    Default SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Since the saga series is meant to take a more in-depth look at a localized area and time period. It seems the American civil war would be a great next time period to look at. The size can be reduced by only having the states at the time with the western territories. It does not need the entire "America" as we know it today. It is a popular time period and I think would do well.

  2. #2
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,938

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    There's a mod about it for Shogun 2 Total war and I think the modder is adding the whole USA there.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  3. #3

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    There's a mod about it for Shogun 2 Total war and I think the modder is adding the whole USA there.
    Interesting. Does it have campaign MP?

  4. #4
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    What is generic formula of any Total War up to now? ......Multiple factions fighing for control. Closest to ACW is FotS scenario but there you have at least multiple clans under same side of barricade.

    How do you propose to make that in ACW? Pick a state and possibly lead to selfown independence? It is inherently scenario with only two sides. No Mexico, Canada, Indians heck not even EU stated interfered too much... Diplomacy basically non existed.

    Plus while it is surely popular in USA, outside it is just american local war. I´m not downplaying it, it is definitely important milestone in American history but it is prime example which will be hard to translated into TW formula.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  5. #5

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Very interesting thread

  6. #6

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruwind View Post
    What is generic formula of any Total War up to now? ......Multiple factions fighing for control. Closest to ACW is FotS scenario but there you have at least multiple clans under same side of barricade.

    How do you propose to make that in ACW? Pick a state and possibly lead to selfown independence? It is inherently scenario with only two sides. No Mexico, Canada, Indians heck not even EU stated interfered too much... Diplomacy basically non existed.

    Plus while it is surely popular in USA, outside it is just american local war. I´m not downplaying it, it is definitely important milestone in American history but it is prime example which will be hard to translated into TW formula.

    That is why I said Saga series. Not the typical Tw series. Were they take a closer more detailed view of a time period.

    I would think that the states can be very independent. They did train, recruit, and equip their own units and had there own politics. Not to say each state was its own faction. I admit it would not be for everyone. No TW is. I haven not bought any Asia based or warhammer because they are no interest of mine. But clearly they sell well. You will always lose some.

  7. #7
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    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...


    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.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  8. #8
    Imperator Majora's Avatar What's under your mask?
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    The Beyond
    Posts
    1,641
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    It's one thing for a saga series to look into particular time periods with a smaller selection of factions. It's quite another to try and make something in a total war style that is not a conventional war for the sake of the series. It would not, in my mind, fit appropriately in any way but a mod for novelty, and its worth for novelty is far surpassed by putting the same/greater effort into a more diverse scope than one war for one country that offers poor integration into the setting of the franchise.

  9. #9
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Moderation Overseer Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    5,192

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Fall of the Samurai should not be taken into account, when discussing the Saga franchise, because the game was developed, released and patched several years, before Creative Assembly even came up with the concept. It was included posthumously in the Saga series for marketing purposes, just after Troy was announced, because otherwise Saga would only be linked to the commercially failed and overall disparaged Throb. That being said, the American Civil War is a very unlikely scenario, which I really doubt it will happen in the foreseeable future. Firstly, Sagas are of limited scope, which essentially rely on the mechanics of previous tent-pole titles. For example, Throb looked like an enhanced version of Attila and shared almost all its animations and glitches with Rome II. This point is further illustrated by the fact that Troy is being developed by the Sofia studio, which obviously lacks the resources and budget of their British colleagues.

    Therefore, something as revolutionary as a 19th century scenario, where warfare was dominated by artillery and rifles is practically impossible. Secondly, setting matters a lot for the reception of the game. Throb was derailed not only because its campaign aspect was extremely simplified, but also due to its historical environment. The 9th century is not even popular among the English, while even a relatively famous historical figure, like Alfred the Great, is barely known outside the United Kingdom. Even in what concerns Three Kingdoms, the Eight Princes pack is recognized as the worst DLC, despite its successors actually introducing quite a few glaring bugs, mainly because its featured scenario lacked the appeal of the Romance. Similarly, the American Civil War is one of the most discussed topics in America, which probably constitutes the largest market for SEGA and its affiliates, but almost nobody cares about it in the rest of the world. For sufficient profitability, CA is forced to choose events and periods that have been really well integrated into modern popular culture. Nowadays, this revolves around Hollywood, which explains their preference for Vikings and Homer, but some other classics, like the Crusades, are also strong candidates.

  10. #10
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    I would not discard FotS so easily. Sure, it is older, sure it is expansion from pre-saga times but surprisingly content wise it is similar scope. I can easily demonstrate that the very same team under Jack Lusten make FotS and ToB as well. Naturally years gap means evolution, we will see jump to Troy as well. And as the last point, FotS is possibly standalone game like ToB. Actually I would prefer ToB to be expansion for Attila as well and fixing some stuff backwards...quess limited resources are limited resources after all.

    And I would wait with judging Sofia studio so harshly, they produced Knights of Honour I, which is quite good similar game to TW in many aspects.
    https://store.steampowered.com/app/2...ghts_of_Honor/
    9/10 score on steam
    https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/knights-of-honor
    88 user score on metacritics

    So let´s see what skill they kept after 15 years..

    EDIT: totally fotgot, Sofia did all "recent" R2 patches and DLCs. Empire Divided, Rise of Republic, Desert Kingdoms. And those definitely aren´t total failures. So i´m eager to see what they will manage with their own game.
    Last edited by Daruwind; April 11, 2020 at 06:39 AM.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  11. #11
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Moderation Overseer Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    5,192

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    It's still completely irrelevant, as it was not designed as a Saga game. It would be the same as judging the future of the Saga franchise, based on Alexander, the Warpath campaign and the Peninsular War. I didn't say the Sofia studio is unskilled. They were a bit inexperienced, in the beginning, as can be shown in the bugs and mistakes included in the Empire Divided, but I'm sure they have improved considerably by now. After all, as you said, Throb was very poorly received for its rudimentary mechanics, which actually became even more paradoxical with the overhaul patch, despite the development being headed by Jack Lusted. The problem of Sofia is their lack of resources. It's a smaller team, with less advanced equipment and the lowest minimum wages in the European Union.

    We can expect good and potentially enjoyable games, like Kingdoms for Medieval II or even vanilla Napoleon, but nothing groundbreaking and particularly amazing, with a long-term capability of maintaining the customers' interests. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Sagas also function as testing experiments: Throb was planned to appease history fans for the Warhammer II teaser debacle and also generate hype for a Game of Thrones title (the trailer music and graphics, as well as the promotional images, have been essentially copy-pasted from the TV show). Similarly, Troy could serve as an introduction for a Mythology Total War, once Warhammer has been exhausted and since fantasy seems to sell better than history.

  12. #12
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    It's still completely irrelevant, as it was not designed as a Saga game. It would be the same as judging the future of the Saga franchise, based on Alexander, the Warpath campaign and the Peninsular War. I didn't say the Sofia studio is unskilled. They were a bit inexperienced, in the beginning, as can be shown in the bugs and mistakes included in the Empire Divided, but I'm sure they have improved considerably by now. After all, as you said, Throb was very poorly received for its rudimentary mechanics, which actually became even more paradoxical with the overhaul patch, despite the development being headed by Jack Lusted. The problem of Sofia is their lack of resources. It's a smaller team, with less advanced equipment and the lowest minimum wages in the European Union.

    We can expect good and potentially enjoyable games, like Kingdoms for Medieval II or even vanilla Napoleon, but nothing groundbreaking and particularly amazing, with a long-term capability of maintaining the customers' interests. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Sagas also function as testing experiments: Throb was planned to appease history fans for the Warhammer II teaser debacle and also generate hype for a Game of Thrones title (the trailer music and graphics, as well as the promotional images, have been essentially copy-pasted from the TV show). Similarly, Troy could serve as an introduction for a Mythology Total War, once Warhammer has been exhausted and since fantasy seems to sell better than history.
    Was not designed as Saga yet fit the scope... Surely definition/expectation are changing over time but if CA produce 3K character base follop up title like Genghis Khan, it will be in same company as Napoleon and Attila. Heck with your words we would be unable to judge/compare even tent-pole games because "a few years passes" so technology,scope...everything moved on. I can ask you easily, what other expansion,DLC...fits the Saga description better then FotS?

    Um I would not start with Legend here, If I remember correctly he was blacklisted for some time, mistake he managed to repair with CA lately...what I found paradoxical is the the video you posted is not the final version - Statecraft patch, I have the game, i can tell 100% sure, https://www.totalwar.com/blog/the-st...e-patch-notes/ and honestly despite being from 28.12.2018 I´m not even sure it is Allegience patch at all. Because Legend said it himself around 1:15ish mark...he loaded X month old save. Now if I remember correctly https://www.totalwar.com/blog/tips-f...a-saved-games/ Allegience patch required new campaign to take full effect, so he was probably on beta only using portion of even the first major update.....

    Anybody here with experience with latest TWs will agree that starting new campaign with major patch is adviced way....so why Am I writing this? Because we are here game for what is no longer be reality. It is bad review, not honest to current situation at least in my eyes. That´s paradoxical here, we can either discuss release state of games...R2,Attila,ToB or discuss current state because not always those two things are the same. I´m not saying it is perfect game or everybody would love it, but I had fun, I finished the game at least... https://i.redd.it/nlz713tnl5a41.png

    Back to Sofia team. I bet this B team with their limited resources will blow ToB from UK A team under Jack. Not because somebody is better or worse but because it seems CA learned from ToB problems. Better setting for Saga etc. Ultimately, we will see.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruwind View Post
    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.

    I think ,military defeat in different areas would stop the snowball effect. Its not like a normal TW where if you capture a state them become your and you recruit the men from that state on your side. Perhaps it would not make a good TW. Also victory can be achieved not by conquest but election. So if the South is doing well enough by nov 64, they can earn independence. There was improvements in military in various ways navel and army in the war. More so then a Victoria era game and it still had all of those units as well. It would be different for sure. But it does have a large fan base. And CA these days is no stranger to different.

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    Similarly, the American Civil War is one of the most discussed topics in America, which probably constitutes the largest market for SEGA and its affiliates, but almost nobody cares about it in the rest of the world. For sufficient profitability, CA is forced to choose events and periods that have been really well integrated into modern popular culture. Nowadays, this revolves around Hollywood, which explains their preference for Vikings and Homer, but some other classics, like the Crusades, are also strong candidates.
    I have found [to my surprise] from playing games like Civil war 2 by Ageod and War of Rights, it seems the majority of players are from Europe. The forums show this as well. I would love to see a crusades saga.
    Last edited by Frunk; April 13, 2020 at 04:35 AM. Reason: Posts merged; embedding of video in quote removed.

  14. #14
    alhoon's Avatar Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    21,938

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Quote Originally Posted by Abdülmecid I View Post
    It would be the same as judging the future of the Saga franchise, based on Alexander, the Warpath campaign and the Peninsular War.
    Peninsular should have been rebranded as Saga too.
    DIE: Diversity, Inclusion, Equality (Pun on SJWs, I am not far-right)
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.

    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  15. #15

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Make it DLC for a Victorian game and restrict it to Union side only so no controversy and there, done.

  16. #16
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,595

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    Make Victoria game with a lot DLCs like ACW, Crimean War, Franco-Prussian War, Boshin War, Austro-Prussian, Italian War of Independence.... War up to Russo-Japanese War (Boer War, Boxer rebellion?)

    I would make it similar to how 3K is working. Base game with 10+/- starting factions/states (United States, France, Britain, Russia.....) and starting date 1820-1840? Playing up to pre WW1. After that there would be DLCs in forms of chapter packs adding additional starting date (little changes to campaign setup, who controls what etc...)

    Like example I will explain it on ACW chapter pack. Base game will include United States and starting date about those 1820-1840. ACW pack will then add dilemas leading to possible conflict. Around date 1850? Compromise of 1850? (i´m not the biggest nerd into ACW so feel free to pick better dstarting ate) and of course ability to play as Confederation from start of War. New units, characters..

    1) for other nations, or when playing different factions, USA will normally go through ACW in historical time frame with option to support either side. (possible South victory). If starting at 1820-1840 or at 1850 in both setups history will be followed probably..
    2) If playing as United states and starting at 1820-1840, in time prior to conflict (1850+) player will get dilemmas with posible prevention of conflict but at cost of course. Imagine simplified version where in several dilemmas you can pick industry/freedom path at cost of increased public penalty at South but getting tech bonuses.... vs agriculture/slave economy focus leading to possible preventing of ACW at cost of research, technologies and maybe preventing heavy industrialization. If keeping history path, dilemmas will escalate into South forming eventually Confederation and war will start...Second starting date will be war beginning at 1861.
    3) If playing as Confederation, player will start at the beginning of war 1961 and while there will be option of military victory (very hard unlikely) there will be also option to end conflict with enough delaying. Basically bore North into peace...after that player can continue with campaign and expand and play as nation

    Similar format can be kept with other chapter packs as well. Franco-Prussian war will add new starting date - 1870. New playable states like Bavaria, new mechanics to cement Second French Empire (and not fall into Third republic ) for France or German unification from Prussian Kingdom, units...
    Last edited by Daruwind; July 01, 2020 at 01:18 AM.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  17. #17

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    1830-1900. Includes the whole world (Africa would be controversial though). Playable European, North American, South American, Middle Eastern, Indian, African and East Asian factions. Most as DLC.

  18. #18

    Default Re: SAGA- AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

    A civil war saga would be an opportunity for CA to experiment in a couple of areas.

    1. 2 types of siege battles. The usual settlement assaults (without walls of course), and assaulting fortified positions. The latter could include entrenchments, battlements, artillery redoubts, things like that.

    2. Much larger unit sizes, upwards of 500 men per unit. Perhaps at the cost of graphical detail if they scaled back to R2/Attila era graphics. So, instead of super-duper graphics, they could work on path-finding and AI for much larger units. Or means of forming detachments in the case of siege battles. Try a few things as befits a Saga.

Posting Permissions

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