You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Rome: Total War Discussion
Moderated by Terikel Grayhair, General Sajaru, Awesome Eagle

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.32 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Rome: Total War Discussion » Rome 2:Total War?
Bottom
Topic Subject:Rome 2:Total War?
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
Decius83
Legionary
posted 21 May 2006 22:02 EDT (US)         
Will there be one? Because Medevil looks awesome and all, but I just like the Roman time period, factions, and units. Not to say I won't buy Medevil 2 and love it!
AuthorReplies:
spartan2
Legionary
posted 21 May 2006 22:13 EDT (US)     1 / 32       
I think this sould be in the Medieval 2: Total War forum. I know it's about M2:TW, but it's basically everything CA will do in the future. I like the Medieval and Ancient atmospheres differently.

Medieval allows for Crusades and knights, trebuchets, and all of that good stuff. I would think it would be eciting taking an M2:TW castle, or storming a more naturally laid out city. Cannons, longbowmen, etc are very appealing, but I think of the Middle Ages of more chaotic, darker, and less organized. This isn't necessarily true, and I don't necessarily think of those traits as bad.

However, I like that in R:TW, it seems brighter, happier, and more organized, with even the barbarian factions seeming happy. Units are fun to toy with, and hoplites and legionnaires are exclusive to this era.

Both have their share of awesome units, from "Armoured Swordsmen" and metal-assed knights to pilum-throwing legionnaires and the phalanx. I think that I will enjoy both R:TW and M2:TW and continue to play R:TW even after the release of M2:TW (along with Medieval, or course). I look forward to the modpacks for both games, and I hope that RTWH doesn't die like AOKH did.


Blah!
Lazy8s
Legionary
posted 21 May 2006 22:34 EDT (US)     2 / 32       
If they ever come out with a civil war: total war series or something from that time period (American civil war that is) I will marry Sega. I don't know why but that time period just seems like it would make for an amazing game.
Ichbinian
Legionary
posted 21 May 2006 23:03 EDT (US)     3 / 32       
R2:TW? Not for another 4-5 years, I surmise. Perhaps even 6. It's been a long 2 years for RTWers, although it still is very popular, and they will want a break - not from the TW series, but RTW in general. M2:TW will last longer than RTW, hands down.

Ichbinian
Oldie from RTWH!
KingofGauls
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 06:12 EDT (US)     4 / 32       
Civil War: Total war??

you gay or something
that's the lamest war you can imagine, who cares about america anyway!

I want to dominate the world, not kill some pussy americans........

They could make a total war game about the netherlands tough, Amsterdam: Total war :P

we did used to be a superworld extreme whatever you call it dominating power thingy in the world (along with england and I believe portugal) during that whole "lets get a ship and rule over some asians" period

BeerMatt
Legionary
(id: Olondi)
posted 22 May 2006 06:39 EDT (US)     5 / 32       
I'd like to see an improved Shogun 2: Total War before Rome 2. I've been playing a bit of S:TW and the campaign map turn system is doing my head in!

-+- Non sequiturs and weak puns a speciality -+-
Bored Scotsman
Legionary
(id: Colonel Sharpe)
posted 22 May 2006 08:50 EDT (US)     6 / 32       

Quote:

I'd like to see an improved Shogun 2: Total War before Rome 2.

I agree, i'd quite like to see them return to Japan at some point.

I think that Napoleonic era would be a struggle in terms of making it exciting (given the predominance of firearms making hand to hand combat less of an issue).

The American Civil war suffers a similar problem, as well as being particuarly esoteric a subject, one that will probably stuggle to gain the attention of anyone outside of America (and considering that CA is British, thats fairly important).


Similar problem with the English Civil War - although the English Civil war could be said to be at a perfect time from the games point of view (firearms were prolific, but Hand to Hand combat was still the norm), as well as the sheer number of Factions they could put together if they did it right - say rather than having Royalists and Rebels they divide the country into factions loyal to either the Crown or Cromwell, etc. etc.

However, as i say it suffers the problem of being very esoteric - it'd be a problem to sell an English Civil War game in the American market.


So it's difficult to see where they can get a new time period from, and it would be extremely nice to see them go back to Shogun given the advances we've had from them.


Colonel Sharpe
Blunderboy
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 09:06 EDT (US)     7 / 32       
I too would love to see a S2:TW release.


WWW.C3LL.NET - War is C3ll
Official RTWH Spelling Enforcement Officer
Voted The Most Normal Looking Forumer, 2005
The saddest sight in all the world is a battle lost. The second saddest sight is a battle won.
Pertti Susilainen
OD Loaf-ward
(id: Sukkit)
posted 22 May 2006 10:26 EDT (US)     8 / 32       
No need for a specific TW on the American Civil War or on the Napoleonic Wars. A general 1700-1860 TW could cover both, if done properly.

Hu seo rag gewat, genap under nihthelm, swa heo no wre
"As for the comment made by eithyddyswcitwr, could you please post back with better grammar that we can all understand, thankyou."
Winner of Sul's Most Obvious Comment Award
Tsunami StudiosWildfire Games
The Frankish Throne (4.6)
Thanatos
Legionary
(id: deathmaster666)
posted 22 May 2006 13:04 EDT (US)     9 / 32       
before medievial 2: total war was announced I thought Napoleon:Total war would be the obvious choice for the next game. That said M2TW is as good, though I wish there was greater representation of native americans.

Help me to tally the forums belief patterns, vote in my poll

Tally so far:-
Agnostics:18
Atheists:28
Theists:42
TheGoldChevron01
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 13:14 EDT (US)     10 / 32       
Hey how about a new world Total War?Say you could have the americas with the aztecs etc and the most western half of europe, like only from spain to the eastern end of germany. They still used a lot of hand to hand fighting, plus you could colonize America as europeans and stuff.

[This message has been edited by TheGoldChevron01 (edited 05-22-2006 @ 01:16 PM).]

shadowarmy
Legionary
(id: shadowarmy75)
posted 22 May 2006 16:49 EDT (US)     11 / 32       
They are doing an expansion like that for MTW2.

"The most virtuous are those who content themselves with being virtuous without seeking to appear so."-Plato
Ichbinian
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 21:31 EDT (US)     12 / 32       
Well, it's part of the vanilla game too - you can travel to the new world and fight the Aztecs.

Ichbinian
Oldie from RTWH!
CK the Fat
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 22:31 EDT (US)     13 / 32       
Buddy, the Netherlands don't have much to brag about themselves, you know.

I think a Total war in the Napoleonic times would be great, like AOEIII but with a more realistic aspect. It could range from 1600 to about 1900 and include France, Britian, Spain, the Dutch, Mexico, Canada, and America (like it or not, the New World was a huge focus of Europe at the time).


"Republicans who did not play the patronage game were ridiculed as the Mugwumps for sitting on the fence--their "mugs" on one side of the fence and "wumps" on the other. Historians generally consider this era a low point in American politics."--United States History by John J. Newman and John M. Schmalbach
TotalWarFanatic
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 22:59 EDT (US)     14 / 32       
Hmm...I don't think they'd make a R2:TW because it's more limited than Mediaval Times and they have a sequal kind of in BI.

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
It would be a violation of my code as a gentleman to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed person.-Veeblefester
Ego is the anesthetic for the pain of stupidity.-me A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
I've put most of my units/skins and ss of them on my new site!:
http://totalwarfantic.tripod.com/
Proud winner of most underrated forumer award!
Led Zeppole
Legionary
posted 22 May 2006 23:12 EDT (US)     15 / 32       
I agree with Sukkit, a game set in the era from roughly 1700 to 1865 might be the way to go. Plenty of nations available to play. Just as rebellion was a problem for the WRE and ERE in BI, colonial rebellion in North and South America (the American Revolution, the rise of Simon Bolivar, the native peoples of North America opposing American westward expansion) or rebellion in Europe (the French Revolution) could be the equivalent if CA decides to do a game in this period (imagine the Confederate States of America as an emergent faction!). Cavalry still played an important role in warfare in this era, though certainly different from that it played in the RTW and M2TW eras, so it would still be present. Just think of all the momentous events and conflicts that happened in this 165-year timeframe; it would make a heck of a game! (The campaign map would have to be enormous, though!)
BeerMatt
Legionary
(id: Olondi)
posted 23 May 2006 03:19 EDT (US)     16 / 32       
@TWF: Shogun had Mongol Invasion and Medieval had Viking Invasion. The expansion packs are not sequels.

-+- Non sequiturs and weak puns a speciality -+-
Pertti Susilainen
OD Loaf-ward
(id: Sukkit)
posted 23 May 2006 06:15 EDT (US)     17 / 32       
Led Zeppole, I purposedly left the American Civil War out because warfare was quite transformed at that time, to the point that it had more to do with 1914 style than with Napoleonic warfare. But of course, for commercial purposes, it would make little sense not including it.

Hu seo rag gewat, genap under nihthelm, swa heo no wre
"As for the comment made by eithyddyswcitwr, could you please post back with better grammar that we can all understand, thankyou."
Winner of Sul's Most Obvious Comment Award
Tsunami StudiosWildfire Games
The Frankish Throne (4.6)
yakcamkir
Seraph Emeritus
posted 23 May 2006 06:22 EDT (US)     18 / 32       
Personally, I think an ancient Total War would work the best, going from the stone age to the rise of Greece. The possibilities for customising your units in campaign are endless, but it would mean sacrificing historical accuracy for good gameplay, which I know some people here hate the idea of.

Rome: Total War Heaven | Medieval II: Total War Heaven | Empire: Total War Heaven
"Do not stand behind Satan in the Post Office queue because the devil takes many forms."
"Your front-page picture of Kate Winslet with a plunging neckline being up for two golden globes was most appropriate."

Unpublished letters to the Daily Telegraph
wlnoble
Legionary
posted 23 May 2006 07:47 EDT (US)     19 / 32       
They might do a 21st Century TW, however the spammers would be hard to beat when they do the Nuclear Spam.

The roadside bombs and suicide belts in campaign mode might also be hard to counter....when expanding the US empire

AuxiliA MieS
Legionary
posted 23 May 2006 09:25 EDT (US)     20 / 32       
WW2:Total War-Europe,it starts in 1939 and with following factions:

Axis:Nazi-Germany,Italy,Romania,Hungary,Bulgaria,Slovakia
Allied:France,British Empire,Poland,Belgium,Netherlands
Neutral:Spain,Portugal,Finland,Soviet Union,Yugoslavia,Norway,Sweden,Denmark,Greece,Switzerland,Ireland

Possibilities to build tank factories,airfields,submarines,carriers,and battleships,and to fight naval and air battles.

Bombers could be used to bomb enemy cities,whil fighters fight air dogfights

submarines could block enemy trade routes

And it could be added the Pacific expansion,featuring Pacific map and Japan,USA,China and British asian troops as new factions

Bored Scotsman
Legionary
(id: Colonel Sharpe)
posted 23 May 2006 12:11 EDT (US)     21 / 32       

Quote:

like it or not, the New World was a huge focus of Europe at the time).

No more so than anywhere else in the empire, if you're going to include the North American colonies in such a game, you've have to throw in India, Singapore, etc.

There was the whole "undiscovered land" thing going on, but after the United States declared Independence, the British and French (the two powers of the time) had larger problems to deal with - India, Africa, Each other, etc.

Not saying that they shouldn't include the new world, but in order to make a good Napoleonic total war they'd need to seriously look at Naval Battles (as the world was essentially run by the Navy in those days) and a near-complete world map.

All in all, it'd be an absolutely massive project.


Colonel Sharpe
spartan2
Legionary
posted 23 May 2006 14:06 EDT (US)     22 / 32       
The problem with these modern and firearm dependent games is that people don't just stand in lines and shoot at each other. Each would have to be its own units, and in that case, leave that to FPSes. I think that Ancient: Total War is a good idea, but I don't think people would find neanderthals very appealing (of course, it would be pretty funny seeing a bunch of naked guys beating each other to death with clubs). A Napolean: Total War would be good, and maybe even New World: Total War. Greek: Total War would be good, as RTW basically portrays Greece as a fallen nation with no power (unless you play as them). But you could have just the rise of Greece to the rise of Macedonia, and each city-state could be its own faction. A revamp of STW would be good, too.

Blah!
TotalWarFanatic
Legionary
posted 23 May 2006 14:08 EDT (US)     23 / 32       

Quote:

@TWF: Shogun had Mongol Invasion and Medieval had Viking Invasion. The expansion packs are not sequels.


I never said they were. I said BI was like a sequel for RTW. It says on the back of the case: "You were there for the rise of Rome now be there fo hte fall."

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
It would be a violation of my code as a gentleman to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed person.-Veeblefester
Ego is the anesthetic for the pain of stupidity.-me A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
I've put most of my units/skins and ss of them on my new site!:
http://totalwarfantic.tripod.com/
Proud winner of most underrated forumer award!
Pertti Susilainen
OD Loaf-ward
(id: Sukkit)
posted 23 May 2006 14:10 EDT (US)     24 / 32       

Quote:

The problem with these modern and firearm dependent games is that people don't just stand in lines and shoot at each other


Exactly. That's the reason why I suggested an hypothetical 1700-1860 timeline, leaving the American Civil War out; although things could perhaps be stretched out a little to include it, together with the Austro-Prussian war and the Franco-Prussian war.

Hu seo rag gewat, genap under nihthelm, swa heo no wre
"As for the comment made by eithyddyswcitwr, could you please post back with better grammar that we can all understand, thankyou."
Winner of Sul's Most Obvious Comment Award
Tsunami StudiosWildfire Games
The Frankish Throne (4.6)
Publius Valerius
Legionary
posted 23 May 2006 14:26 EDT (US)     25 / 32       
WW2:TW would not work...it would be like having an army of Arcani and sneaking them around each other...WW2 did not have battle lines, one of the first wars not to. It was more company based than whole armies being thrown at each other.

Vae Victus
(\__/)
(O.o )
(> < )
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames