What do you think the next historical Total War game will be?

[Alwyn]

Creative Assembly recently mentioned "in-development titles across Fantasy and Historical @totalwar". What do you think the next historical Total War game will be?

* Rome III
* Three Kingdoms II
* Medieval III
* Empire 2
* Shogun 3
* Something else (you can specify on the poll thread)

[mishkin]

I've been racking my brain for a long minute thinking of other times/continents in which the game could be set and I haven't come up with anything remotely interesting.

Conclusions
- Players we lack culture and imagination.
- CA lacks imagination and/or culture and is not here to educate us.

[Alwyn]

Good question! I've seen people wanting a Pike and Shot Total War. Mods such as 1648 - Thirty Years of War and Colonialism 1600 AD suggest that this could be popular. I've seen some players wanting mid to late 19th century settings as well, and mods such as The Blue and the Grey, Victoria Total War and Secession Civil War suggest that there's support for this period too.

I don't know if the development of the Ultimate General games by Game-Labs make it more or less likely that new gunpowder-era Total War games would be made (or if it makes no difference).

[Abdülmecid I]

Three Kingdoms II was being developed under the leadership of Jack Lusted, but it has since then been cancelled. Approximately one year ago, CA was developing a game centered around World War I, whose original release date was supposed to be 2024. However, the project ran into serious difficulties and it has either been delayed or (more likely) shelved indefinitely. If that's indeed the case, then Medieval III seems like the strongest candidate, because it's a very popular period. At least regarding fantasy, we know that CA is working on Warhammer '40K, to be followed most probably by Star Wars. I guess they are planning to release the former next year, so an announcement might arrive until February or March at the latest.

[Alastor]

Considering the trajectory in recent titles Britannia->Three Kingdoms->Troy->Pharaoh I would guess the most likely next title would be "Paleolithic: Total War" chronicling the struggle between Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens.

[Sir Adrian]

If they're smart it's going to be Medieval III or Empire II using a new engine.

[mishkin]

The Middle Ages is a very hackneyed topic, but Medieval 2 is really very improvable.

I still prefer it to Shogun 2 or Attila, but not everybody is stuck in the 90s i guess. If the guys of ca granted me three wishes, two would be to remasterize, in the style of Rome 1, shogun and medieval 1

[Muizer]

I think there's still a lot of potential in the 'Dark Ages'. Roughly 500-1000 AD. Thrones of Britannia is set in this era, but there's no reason it couldn't be expanded to encompass all of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

[mishkin]

I think there's still a lot of potential in the 'Dark Ages'. Roughly 500-1000 AD. Thrones of Britannia is set in this era, but there's no reason it couldn't be expanded to encompass all of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

Isnt this period and territories not covered in Attila?

[Muizer]

Only in part as a DLC afaik

[Adrian Adelson]

If I had to choose, I would definitely choose Rome, because I like that version of the game the most. But overall, Medieval III will probably see the light of day due to long-standing community demand and Creative Assembly's ability to modernize a beloved formula with its current capabilities. However, Empire 2 also has every chance of being a new implementation, especially if they want to do something more ambitious on a global scale.

Why am I banned? always preview before clicking odd links.

[NorseThing]

If total war is smart (?) they would contact a developer of a successful mod and buy into redeveloping the mod as a sequel of the base game. CA can do more because of code access. Any older game will improve by simple improvements in graphics as well. Sequels are always easy money spinners as Hollywood has proven.

Jack Lusted is a great example.

[Alwyn]

So far, Medieval III is what most of us expect. I can see how mechanics used in Pharaoh - such as dynamic weather which affects the terrain, with effects which vary depending on the type of unit (such as heavy infantry struggling more in mud than light infantry) would work in a medieval setting.

Pharaoh has a troubled launch (although it's fun to play, in my experience), so CA might be looking for a safe option. I agree with Fraser Brown that Medieval III seems likely, as it would be seen as a safe option. But would Medieval III be safe?

There are a lot of reasons why people loved Medieval II - IlluminatiRex and Flinn discussed them in their 10th anniversary review, where Flinn said:

the title has truly millions of fans around the world, and not only for the Vanilla version, but why then? In my opinion, due to three main reasons: the setting of medieval warfare, which is probably the most appreciated (along with the Roman one), because of the most classical view of chivalry and feudalism and of course for the fast changing scenarios; the easy moddability of the game, which allowed the creation of hundreds of mods and thousands of submods, some of which reached the level of recognized masterpieces (even a neophyte like me can apply some solid changes to the main campaign without need for guidance and by just modifying a single text file); and of course the overall quality of the original work, which has been increased sensibly over the years by CA and indipendent modders.

Flinn mentioned the moddability of the game. Even if newer games cannot be as moddable as Medieval II, it would be great if a Medieval III was designed with moddability as a core feature. Also, of course, some players loved hotseat games. If Medieval III had the strengths of Medieval II - including being more moddable, and if it had a multiplayer mode with the kind of features that Warhammer III multiplayer campaigns have (simultaneous turns and up to eight players in the same campaign) - I think that would make a big difference to its popularity.

[Dismounted Feudal Knight]

Is Medieval III what we expect, or just what we want (naturally, given a majority of our traffic is medieval stuff)? The first one's tricky. Empire 2 is realistic, I could see a 3kx2 (sorry, had to). I don't think a Med 3 (or frankly empire 2) under current conditions would go well on either side, those looking to recapture the old magic or for CA given the likely balooned expectations of such a large title. I don't think CA wants its next medieval, empire or anything huge to be a dark spot. So if they want to continue the same platform it should be something else more humble, and if they want a new platform, a revolutionary title, then imo something saga size should take the fall of experiments. Medieval 3 should then take advantage of improvements and sell its novelty on being much larger in scale. But now I'm thinking should, not what they would do. So it's hard to say. What I can expect is that they'll try not to fit into any of these boxes and try to do something novel at least in scope (I wouldn't rule out WW1 completely).

I'm hoping all the while they try to address the core engine whatever they decide and not glue more on top of warhammer, troy, etc, lest they want to get a Bethesda reputation...

[Sir Adrian]

Medieval III is what we demand. It would work really well but if and only if they change the engine. Warscape was not made for melee battles and as much as they have modified it over the years they never managed to really make up for that.

[NorseThing]

The problem with any engine is the transition between melee and gunpowder. Or the transition between differing distances which is related to gunpowder It becomes most obvious with naval combat in Empire, but always a factor with all games. This was the unbalanced factor even in Shogun I with winning with the peasant armies. Back to Empire -- multiple corps in true Napoleonic fashion need a much larger effective field of battle to deal with supply and bringing forces together for the final climatic battle.


Edit: If you played with miniatures, this is all part and parcel to the limitation of the combat engine.

[mishkin]

I feel like an idiot, but I just want something simple and pretty.

[NorseThing]

There is great value in simple and pretty. Do not sell yourself short.

[flo463]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed (without much conviction, however) for a Medieval III with also a better historicity than the two previous ones (yes I dream I know)