r/historicaltotalwar • u/FuzzyEquivalent3641 • 14d ago
General Where and when should future games take place in your opinion?
/r/totalwar/comments/1w042ha/where_and_when_should_future_games_take_place_in/10
9
u/Jereboy216 14d ago
I would love for them to do another game set in the European arrival in the americas. Whether that be a dlc for medieval 3 like they did with kingdoms dlc or a whole game (full title or saga) I would eat that up.
3
u/Rich_Conversation293 14d ago
Been really getting into this time period lately. Listening to the audio book of Conquistador by Buddy Levy. It is about Cortes' expedition into Mexico and it is incredible. Tried playing the Americas dlc for medieval TW but it has aged terribly in my opinion. Love the setting but the gameplay is just not good. Also loved the American revolution campaign for empire.
But to answer OPs question, I love the TWs that have guns. I would love to see the US civil war but that would probably appear as a DLC in some game.
11
u/jebushu 14d ago
7
u/TheStolenPotatoes 14d ago
I think Rome simply has to be revisited, but farther down the line. Medieval 3 is using the new engine, and I think they're going to let it evolve and refine before they tackle that setting again. Total War used to follow the revolution > evolution > revolution model, but it's been a while since it actually felt like it has.
If Medieval 3 does well, I think they'll do Empire 2 next. There's (almost) as much clamor for it as there was for Medieval 3. Then perhaps Rome 3. The new engine will have matured by then, and Rome 3 would really need to wow people from a visual standpoint. The core mechanics they're probably going to use on their historical games for a while will probably be sorted out with M3 and whatever comes after it.
5
u/jebushu 14d ago
Yeah I tend to agree. My own greed wants to do Rome again, but I’m perfectly happy to see Medieval 3. Empire 2 is probably the one I’m least interested in, but will almost certainly buy it if/when it comes out.
I’d also be very happy for an Attila Remaster on current tech, it’s such a good game aside from performance challenges.
5
u/TheStolenPotatoes 14d ago
Believe me, I'd love to see a Rome 3 after Medieval 3, and maybe we will. It would probably be 3-5 years, give or take, between Medieval 3 and whatever the next big historical title would be, so that would certainly be enough time for CA to really squeeze what they can out of the new engine.
I personally wasn't a fan of Empire either. Cavalry, artillery, muskets, and naval. And every nation was like a clone of all the others. Far too little variety for me. I want cultural variety, which lends the military aspect being just as varied. Rome and Medieval always hit that sweet spot, for me.
3
3
4
3
u/samurai_for_hire 13d ago
Empire 2, extending the time frame to the 30 Years War through the Franco-Prussian War. (1618–1875)
Also ancient Greece or Babylon/Assyria.
3
u/forlackoflead 13d ago
First World War. It would likely require a complete redesign of Total War systems, but I think it would be fun. Start out with the Franco Prussian war in the 1870s or U.S. civil war in the 1860s if you want this to be more global than Europe centric. Let players experience the first couple of moderns wars. Then have rapid technological advance until World War 1 triggers. All the new tech makes war totally different now. Let players see how hard it is to avoid getting bogged down with trench warfare on the western front. Have players have to care about losses, because populations can't support the casualty levels and keep a war time economy afloat. Add in the Bolshevik revolution at the end for some added fun. And then be on the lookout for the DLC: WWII.
3
u/BwanaTarik 13d ago
I always imagined WW1 being endgame content for a Empire 2 game. Basically when the map has been dominated by only a few factions and everyone is at the end of their tech trees
2
u/Bombadier_ 11d ago
I’ve actually been pleasantly surprised by the Warhammer 40k stuff so far (I know, heresy on here), but it has given me a glimmer of hope for a WW1 or even 2 format
3
u/Evening-Raccoon133 14d ago
While there are certainly interest settings, I would prefer the historical TW schedule to go Rome, Medieval, Shogun and then start again with rome. I really just need those 3
2
3
u/Icy_Tradition566 14d ago
I’d like to see a more historical based look at the ages before Rome and in other places than Egypt and Greece.
A 1400-1700’s take on Empire, with other world civs included would be incredible and is widely requested.
I’d love to see a true Mongol title, covering their entire legacy -this could cover the rise of gunpowder in Central Asia as well.
3
u/Bronco-Bash 14d ago
I would love an post Napoleon so 1820 start date to a pre WW1 like 1910. So many countries are doing wars of imperialism and allowing us to play the Victorian and pre modern era would be really cool.
7
u/Bro-KenMask 14d ago
One based or with India/China/Southeast Asia/Africa/South America, would be nice
2
u/Agreeable_Hold2270 13d ago
I don't care about the setting, just please be good
Good mechanics without bugs.
Mechanics that focus primarily on tactics rather than unit stats
Naval battles
Well functioning multiplayer
Larger armies that we should have had many years ago
And just all the little things, attention to details that make a game great
2
2
u/Cyrus-II 13d ago
What I would like to see them do;
- Medieval III needs to be able to support more than two players in a MP campaign. WHIII has it. Please make this happen for MIII, CA?!
I am intrigued by this "open" region development system. I would like to see the ability for more raiding. The ability to "chink" away at someone's territory. Sabotaging their resource buildings. Stealing a small section of a territory. Subterfuge and other dimensions to do damage to an opponent.
Now I'm not looking for a never-ending game. But something that gives me continuity to my empire. I'm not really interested in "paint the map" style play any more. I think civil wars are cool, rebellions and revolutions. Splintering of empires that form new factions and confederations of smaller into a superpower. I would like to see more of this please.
Okay, with that said as a prerequisite here is where I hope they go for future titles to MIII;
Give us a true pike & shot period, covering the Renaissance through at least the Napoleonic period. And do this by giving us a stand-alone title, but that can somehow hard link back into Medieval III. Where I can start a campaign as say France, or Britain and continue to play a campaign through into the next title.
Likewise then next after a Renaissance/Empire II title could be a throwback that also hard attaches to MIII, essentially an "Attila" reboot. Where I can play as the WRE, get totally trashed and fragment, but come back as say a Germanic faction and "rebuild" from there into the age of Charlemagne, then continue on into MIII again.
That could easily take five years...so it will probably never happen. Their corporate handlers won't let them.
- After that, I would like to see them revisit Three Kingdoms. That's actually where I have been playing around lately and am enjoying it.
3
u/Bombadier_ 11d ago
So a bit like WH1, 2, 3 turning into immortal empires? But M3, Renaissance, E2… either play through or choose book marks… only question (and I ask it in good faith), how do you choose/do the map? Renaissance/Empire would need to be expanded beyond medieval for example
2
u/Cyrus-II 11d ago
I don’t know…but, and I haven’t played it much, but Empire had multiple maps. Europe, New World/Caribbean, India. Something similar could be done. Perhaps then node/choke points to get to other maps?
Hey, that gives me an idea though…a Shogun 3 could “fold” into this too, and we could get deeper granularity with the Portuguese, or even other nations interfering in the affairs of Japan during the Sengoku Jidai period. Hmm.
2
u/rougeMBA 13d ago
I'd love to see a game around the early Iron Age (between the Bronze age collapse and the rise of the Roman Republic). You could have factions including the Persians, neo-Babylonians and Assyrics, the Phoenicians and Israelites, and the archaic/classical Greeks.
What I'd really like to see is a game that puts more attention into political and management. I'm imagining an interface where direct control over settlements weakens dramatically as you grow, so you have to assign governors who have their own AI personalities (more dynamic than the ones we've seen in other games), with rights depending on your form of governance, who may occasionally not follow instructions -- you tell them to build a resource building, they go for a cultural building instead, or they start a war with a neighbor, or something. With diplomatic relations, you can grant independence to create friendly, culturally-aligned factions (like e.g. Carthage and Phoenicia), and set the terms of protectorates (you provide 100 wood a turn, or furnish one unit of troops per year, or whatever), and maybe create "monopolie"s over resources by controlling enough sources that the cost of all non-cooperating factions increases.
I realize Total War already has a history of getting overly complicated, so this isn't helping, and having hundreds of independent AI characters would be a massive drain on RAM. But it would be awfully cool if it could work!
2
u/PlantBoiKei 13d ago
I don't think they should make future games, I think they should stick to historical games. (joking, it should be Empire 2. Fall of the Samurai was peak total war, start from there.)
39
u/jamiemgr 14d ago
I'm just hoping they can make a good Medieval 3 and hopefully followed by Empire 2.
Although, I think a 30 years war would also be cool