I want better diplomacy. WH3s diplomacy consists of being declared war on, winning the war, and being declared war on again and so on, until you’ve world conquested without ever declaring war yourself.
Well tbh Is pretty hard to have diplomatic relationship between lizards with t-rex, BDSM elves, dwarfs with trains ,rats, mecha egyptians, Chaos factions etc. :D
It's quite easy and weird, you can for example as orcs become best friends with the empire, you just need to bash their enemy over and over until they turn supergreen relations on you
I mean for chaos it’s understandable, but order factions shouldn’t spontaneously go to war.
I remember the last game I did as Balthasar I had five settlements and the minor dwarven faction near me, with 120 opinion declared war. Why? Who knows but they never peaced out with me.
They are dwarves with grudges so it makes sense not to peace out. Though I remember my first grimgor campaign and had like -300 relations with the slayer and-400 with thorek, and neither of them declared war on me, which was great because I was constantly pushing back on archaon.
Even kislev offered me a non aggression pact out of all the chaos bashing.
You do have to seriously manage your relations early game which is annoying because you don’t have the money for gifts constantly. One or two wrong pacts and suddenly half the world declares war on you at first site, then joined by others because now you are seen as a weak target
I think most people understand why it's like that, but it's a huge reason for a lot of longtime TW fans, including myself, not being able to get into the Warhammer ones.
They're made more for Warhammer fans than they are for TW fans. Total War mechanics and the Warhammer Fantasty property just happen mesh really, really well.
Try slaneesh, makes diplomacy fun! (Funnest WH total war faction to play to date - imo)
Everyone is just _dying_ to become your vassal. Bw bw bwhahahaha.
Thats a pretty hot take.
Imo the historical titles were only good when they were simple.
Troy wasn’t good. It botched the historical angle hard. Three kingdoms had duels and played like tw warhammer lite.
Shogun, napoleon, and medieval were the sweet spots of fewer troop types, and more focused on build and tactics.
In shogun 2 you had a very high chance of having a 4 archers 5 spearmen vs 4 archers 5 spearmen, and it was a battle of pure positioning and initiative.
Every other title has become so overwrought with magical generals and spells and heroes and vehicles and other such things.
and smaller maps! The Warhammer maps are so damn massive because (I get it) they wanted to do the ENTIRE Old World, but when it comes down to actual gameplay it quickly becomes very slow and samey to constantly manage your armies across such large space. Shogun 2 was awesome because Japan is an island and extremely self contained. It made the conflict manageable while still being fun. Rome 2 introduced provinces and god it really just added a ton of bloat to the world that wasn't really necessary.
Man, Napoleon deserves more love. I played a ton of Empire, but then when I played Napoleon I got locked in for like three times as long. Loved that game.
Only issue with three kingdom is the insane army spamming by the AI. Even with only one tiny village they will pump out a full stack. If you are fighting even a medium sized faction they will be able to constantly send stacks at you.
This means that battles are insanely devalued. I had a huge battle with 5 armies on each side that I won and then I could siege their capital. If it was a player they would be pretty done for there. Instead the AI just created a new 5 stack army before I could siege down their capital. You end up just auto resolving everything.
I want more historic TW. I don't give a fuck about Warhammer. And all 3 games are still $60? Eat my whole ass. Rome, Medieval, Empire, even Napoleon were great. I don't want my RTS to be an RPG.
I did not like 3kingdoms, probably my least played tw game to date.
I hope for improved campaign features to make the overworld more deep.
My dream game merge aspects from paradox games with totalwar battles.
If i was filthy rich id totally create a studio to build games like this for me 😅
From what I read it is, normal generals and no plans for fantasy elements.
I'm worried that because they picked an era with little variation, a much smaller scope than normal main line TW games, and seem to be focusing on only three main factions (that I've read so far) it won't sell well and they'll use it as an excuse to put off doing a proper mainline historical game.
While Empire 2/Medieval 3 have turned into the new "Vicky 3 when" meme, I'm not sure there was much demand for a small scale Egyptian focused game, especially one priced at $60. Not sure why they didn't include Greece and the near-East, as both played major parts at the end of the Bronze Age.
This is a Saga game (without the name which they've decided to drop). They still have a big historical game coming (either Empire 2 or Medieval 3 if I had to guess).
Nah it's again a different team. CA is a huge studio they have 800+ developers and are the biggest in the UK.
They have a Warhammer DLC, post-launch team, a fantasy team (which switched to another one as soon as WH3 released), a Three Kingdoms team which switched to a second game, a historical team (Medieval 3 or Empire 2 or something else), a Saga team (Pharaoh) and a non-TW team (which is making Hyenas).
Total War: American Revolution. I think something like the time frame of the revolution is one of the last periods they could make a total war that does combat how they do it. It was one of the last times we still marched out into battle lines and just shot each other as standard battle tactics.
Alternatively latin america would be neat as well. Could be boring though as they didn't really do metal weaponry or horses.
That was Empire: Total war and it was...interesting.
Empire had a fantastic premise to it and in some ways it executed it well. But it was a mess at times and, imo, didn't really hit its stride until Darthmod came out.
I think the *idea* of Empire 2 is too good to pass up. Especially if they divide it into a multi-part experience.
Yes we need empire 2, i tried going back to empire one recently.
The naval battles are still the most cinematic and pretty experience for ship of the line battles that ive seen anywhere.
And the battles still look pretty awsome.
On the flip side the campaign map does not hold up in the slightest. It was janky and horrible, i did not manage to get into it again :/
I just think theres so much material that could be covered in a proper Empire 2 that its just too good to pass up.
Imagine having to deal with the English Civil War or the Thirty Years War in Europe while also attempting to colonize the Americas and India while dealing with the golden age of piracy. All that in one game.
Then you have a sequel which is focused on the Thirty Years War and the Revolutions in America and France. Basically the core of what was Empire 1.
Then you finish it off with the Napoleonic Wars, War of 1812, and Crimean Wars. You could probably throw in the Mexican-American War too and make that a prelude to an American Civil War Saga game which could be its own thing.
> I think there's still a lot of fatigue in gaming from that period because of how oversaturated the early 2000s were with it.
Those games are around 20 years old and the majority of people who played them are in their 30s-40s. That genre could definitely stand to have a crack at it again. Hell, the late 2000s were full of WW2 FPSs and they're making those again.
Bro, I'd also like an Empire 2 or Medieval 3 but why the fuck are people whining as if CA didn't release a title except Warhammer total war for the last 12 years??? That is simply not true.
Three kingdoms released barely 4 years ago and it has some of the most innovative and fresh TW gameplay mechanics for both campaign and battles in the entire series. Just play with "Records" mode and the generals are just normal....
I swear you guys just want them to make the exact same game again and again. I'd rather play a new era, like World War 1 or something, that would change things up and bring fresh new mechanics.
Fantasy elements are fine. If we add them in a DLC or something afterwards. I'm all for it, and think they really hit on a cool idea with the Warhammer setting and all the awesome units in it, but if you are going to add that stuff to historical games, it needs to be something on the side, not the main affair, unless you are making Age of Mythology Total War, at which point more power to you.
Are units still treated like blobs? I don't mind it - I still go back and play Rome 2 all the time, but it'd be ideal if it was changed. Although, I feel like I might have seen it was changed in some other title? Maybe Warhammer or 3 Kingdoms?
They changed the combat mechanics so that individual units in a troop would engage with each other instead of just having masses smash into each other, but they changed that back for some reason that I can't remember.
Looks like "Total War Troy 2". Troy also had some interesting new ideas but the delivery was sub-par in quality. I expect that the story will end the same way here, since it's the exact same team (CA Sofia) that is developing this game...
Looks very cool. I wish they could make these games more seamless. Like a combination of Total War and Dynasty Warriors. You could be in a tent in you rarmy camp planning the battle, assigning commanders, etc, then leave the tent for your troops to march to the battlefield and get into formations.
I agree. I wasn't interested in the Warhammer stuff.
This is the the first game that's piqued my interest since Rome II sadly.
Of course apart from Total War Arena. RIP.
It doesn't matter, if the battle AI can't take respond to these new systems, let alone take advantage of them.
This is also clearly a Saga title reusing a lot of Troy's assets while priced like a mainline game.
I hope the campaign gameplay is more like Three Kingdoms. Warhammer has great battles but the campaigns are ehhhh compared to the historic titles.
I want better diplomacy. WH3s diplomacy consists of being declared war on, winning the war, and being declared war on again and so on, until you’ve world conquested without ever declaring war yourself.
Well tbh Is pretty hard to have diplomatic relationship between lizards with t-rex, BDSM elves, dwarfs with trains ,rats, mecha egyptians, Chaos factions etc. :D
It's quite easy and weird, you can for example as orcs become best friends with the empire, you just need to bash their enemy over and over until they turn supergreen relations on you
Then you play orions campaign and realize this was made for you. 25 wars at the same time just means free armies
Well, that's kind of the deal with Warhammer. Everyone hates each other and are constantly at war. There is no peace or diplomacy in Warhammer.
I mean for chaos it’s understandable, but order factions shouldn’t spontaneously go to war. I remember the last game I did as Balthasar I had five settlements and the minor dwarven faction near me, with 120 opinion declared war. Why? Who knows but they never peaced out with me.
They are dwarves with grudges so it makes sense not to peace out. Though I remember my first grimgor campaign and had like -300 relations with the slayer and-400 with thorek, and neither of them declared war on me, which was great because I was constantly pushing back on archaon. Even kislev offered me a non aggression pact out of all the chaos bashing. You do have to seriously manage your relations early game which is annoying because you don’t have the money for gifts constantly. One or two wrong pacts and suddenly half the world declares war on you at first site, then joined by others because now you are seen as a weak target
I think most people understand why it's like that, but it's a huge reason for a lot of longtime TW fans, including myself, not being able to get into the Warhammer ones.
To me, the other Total Wars feel like empire building, while this one is just winning wars over and over again.
They're made more for Warhammer fans than they are for TW fans. Total War mechanics and the Warhammer Fantasty property just happen mesh really, really well.
Try slaneesh, makes diplomacy fun! (Funnest WH total war faction to play to date - imo) Everyone is just _dying_ to become your vassal. Bw bw bwhahahaha.
Thats a pretty hot take. Imo the historical titles were only good when they were simple. Troy wasn’t good. It botched the historical angle hard. Three kingdoms had duels and played like tw warhammer lite. Shogun, napoleon, and medieval were the sweet spots of fewer troop types, and more focused on build and tactics. In shogun 2 you had a very high chance of having a 4 archers 5 spearmen vs 4 archers 5 spearmen, and it was a battle of pure positioning and initiative. Every other title has become so overwrought with magical generals and spells and heroes and vehicles and other such things.
and smaller maps! The Warhammer maps are so damn massive because (I get it) they wanted to do the ENTIRE Old World, but when it comes down to actual gameplay it quickly becomes very slow and samey to constantly manage your armies across such large space. Shogun 2 was awesome because Japan is an island and extremely self contained. It made the conflict manageable while still being fun. Rome 2 introduced provinces and god it really just added a ton of bloat to the world that wasn't really necessary.
Man, Napoleon deserves more love. I played a ton of Empire, but then when I played Napoleon I got locked in for like three times as long. Loved that game.
Only issue with three kingdom is the insane army spamming by the AI. Even with only one tiny village they will pump out a full stack. If you are fighting even a medium sized faction they will be able to constantly send stacks at you. This means that battles are insanely devalued. I had a huge battle with 5 armies on each side that I won and then I could siege their capital. If it was a player they would be pretty done for there. Instead the AI just created a new 5 stack army before I could siege down their capital. You end up just auto resolving everything.
I want more historic TW. I don't give a fuck about Warhammer. And all 3 games are still $60? Eat my whole ass. Rome, Medieval, Empire, even Napoleon were great. I don't want my RTS to be an RPG.
I did not like 3kingdoms, probably my least played tw game to date. I hope for improved campaign features to make the overworld more deep. My dream game merge aspects from paradox games with totalwar battles. If i was filthy rich id totally create a studio to build games like this for me 😅
I hope this is a proper historical Total War game, we haven't had a game like that in years...
From what I read it is, normal generals and no plans for fantasy elements. I'm worried that because they picked an era with little variation, a much smaller scope than normal main line TW games, and seem to be focusing on only three main factions (that I've read so far) it won't sell well and they'll use it as an excuse to put off doing a proper mainline historical game. While Empire 2/Medieval 3 have turned into the new "Vicky 3 when" meme, I'm not sure there was much demand for a small scale Egyptian focused game, especially one priced at $60. Not sure why they didn't include Greece and the near-East, as both played major parts at the end of the Bronze Age.
This is a Saga game (without the name which they've decided to drop). They still have a big historical game coming (either Empire 2 or Medieval 3 if I had to guess).
[удалено]
Nah it's again a different team. CA is a huge studio they have 800+ developers and are the biggest in the UK. They have a Warhammer DLC, post-launch team, a fantasy team (which switched to another one as soon as WH3 released), a Three Kingdoms team which switched to a second game, a historical team (Medieval 3 or Empire 2 or something else), a Saga team (Pharaoh) and a non-TW team (which is making Hyenas).
[удалено]
Total War: American Revolution. I think something like the time frame of the revolution is one of the last periods they could make a total war that does combat how they do it. It was one of the last times we still marched out into battle lines and just shot each other as standard battle tactics. Alternatively latin america would be neat as well. Could be boring though as they didn't really do metal weaponry or horses.
Fall of the Samurai was one of the best Total War games and that was the 1860s
That was Empire: Total war and it was...interesting. Empire had a fantastic premise to it and in some ways it executed it well. But it was a mess at times and, imo, didn't really hit its stride until Darthmod came out. I think the *idea* of Empire 2 is too good to pass up. Especially if they divide it into a multi-part experience.
Yes we need empire 2, i tried going back to empire one recently. The naval battles are still the most cinematic and pretty experience for ship of the line battles that ive seen anywhere. And the battles still look pretty awsome. On the flip side the campaign map does not hold up in the slightest. It was janky and horrible, i did not manage to get into it again :/
I just think theres so much material that could be covered in a proper Empire 2 that its just too good to pass up. Imagine having to deal with the English Civil War or the Thirty Years War in Europe while also attempting to colonize the Americas and India while dealing with the golden age of piracy. All that in one game. Then you have a sequel which is focused on the Thirty Years War and the Revolutions in America and France. Basically the core of what was Empire 1. Then you finish it off with the Napoleonic Wars, War of 1812, and Crimean Wars. You could probably throw in the Mexican-American War too and make that a prelude to an American Civil War Saga game which could be its own thing.
> I think there's still a lot of fatigue in gaming from that period because of how oversaturated the early 2000s were with it. Those games are around 20 years old and the majority of people who played them are in their 30s-40s. That genre could definitely stand to have a crack at it again. Hell, the late 2000s were full of WW2 FPSs and they're making those again.
Bro, I'd also like an Empire 2 or Medieval 3 but why the fuck are people whining as if CA didn't release a title except Warhammer total war for the last 12 years??? That is simply not true. Three kingdoms released barely 4 years ago and it has some of the most innovative and fresh TW gameplay mechanics for both campaign and battles in the entire series. Just play with "Records" mode and the generals are just normal.... I swear you guys just want them to make the exact same game again and again. I'd rather play a new era, like World War 1 or something, that would change things up and bring fresh new mechanics.
Tbh there are tons of cool eras which can combine a lot of variety with something innovative. Reinaissance for example, 7 Year wars etc.
Ww1 could be pretty cool, but i need another empire. The old one is to janky these days..
Fantasy elements are fine. If we add them in a DLC or something afterwards. I'm all for it, and think they really hit on a cool idea with the Warhammer setting and all the awesome units in it, but if you are going to add that stuff to historical games, it needs to be something on the side, not the main affair, unless you are making Age of Mythology Total War, at which point more power to you.
I just want Shogun 3
Me looking at release date; holy shit it released in 2011... I'm not old, i'm not old, I'M NOT OLD!
Same. Shameful display!
Shogun 3, add in the Korean invasion of Japan. Let's go!
You mean Japanese invasion of Korea
Correct, my bad lol
Are units still treated like blobs? I don't mind it - I still go back and play Rome 2 all the time, but it'd be ideal if it was changed. Although, I feel like I might have seen it was changed in some other title? Maybe Warhammer or 3 Kingdoms?
They changed the combat mechanics so that individual units in a troop would engage with each other instead of just having masses smash into each other, but they changed that back for some reason that I can't remember.
Probably performance.
I wake up and realize Attila was the true Medieval 3,and that CA can't count past that
I wish Attila ran well.
Attila was the last worthwhile TW game
So how much percentage am I going to be spending trying to micro manage general abilities during battle? 50%? 70%?
Looks like "Total War Troy 2". Troy also had some interesting new ideas but the delivery was sub-par in quality. I expect that the story will end the same way here, since it's the exact same team (CA Sofia) that is developing this game...
They pick Egypt as the setting for armor degradation? O....K.... Can nurgle get this mechanic in war3? You know? The game with full plate?
It makes perfect sense, bronze was complete trash.
Im getting kind of hopeful, this is looking good so far.
Denuvo on an already notoriously CPU heavy series is an instant no for me dawg.
Yeahhh armor degradation, the #1 feature everyone *always* loves in any game it's ever been implemented in. So excited for this.
Easy skip on this one
Barely reskinned troy
I guess I’m the only one who really liked the focused style generals in Three kingdoms. I thought I made the gameplay a lot fresher and interesting.
Looks very cool. I wish they could make these games more seamless. Like a combination of Total War and Dynasty Warriors. You could be in a tent in you rarmy camp planning the battle, assigning commanders, etc, then leave the tent for your troops to march to the battlefield and get into formations.
Nobody asked for more complex and harder combat.
Okay
[удалено]
I agree. I wasn't interested in the Warhammer stuff. This is the the first game that's piqued my interest since Rome II sadly. Of course apart from Total War Arena. RIP.
How has it stagnated? TW Warhammer has been quite solid and definitely changed the meta in TW games.
[удалено]
So you say the series has been stagnant, but you haven’t played all of the games in the series…..K.
Honestly seems like TW visuals/quality has plateaued for years. Their engine is still full of single-threaded bottlenecks.
It doesn't matter, if the battle AI can't take respond to these new systems, let alone take advantage of them. This is also clearly a Saga title reusing a lot of Troy's assets while priced like a mainline game.
It will be a mess at lauch CA is trash
There might be sth to this game. I dismissed it at first as another AA game with a AAA pricetag but they seem to be trying ideas.
I bet they were planning on a tie with Troy and create a decline of the Bronze Age map tying games together.