>total war this, CA that
Ok, but what do you anons actually want to see, in terms of new Total War games (or Total War clones)? What new (or old) improvements?
I'm personally bored of Warhammer, as a setting, even if I like dark elves.
So setting-wise I would like to see either Medieval 3 or something from Iron Age, or a new fantasy setting that could take inspiration history instead of adapting shlock, maybe early medieval fantasy, think Atilla Total War but with fantasy races and elements, magic.
As far as gameplay improvements go, I would like to see more customization and sandbox elements to make games more personalized and cater to player + some utility. It would be partially something like Crusader Kings 2 campaign settings.
You could take inspiration from Warhammer 2 and it's mods in some ways - better camera mod. Diplomatic options and region trading for the player to reduce the border gore, option to disable siege battles for minor settlements or only have them on x conditions (as a campaign setting) to reduce the number of annoying siege battles and a way to have more open field battles.
Unit caps for elite units to reduce the elite doomstack spam, as a campaign option.
Hotseat mode so that we can play multiple (or all) factions at the same time in the same campaign, that used to be an option in older total war games.
Also, improve custom battles, I would like more customization and sandbox, we are just playing with digital toy soldiers here, after all, give us more options.
Like allow us to mix and match units from different factions, to set up more roleplay scenarios. Allow to place our and enemy tropes whenever we want (optionally), to set up different battle scenarios. Hell, even allow to control both sides of the battle.
I'm missing some other things, probably, but this is the gist.
Also, no more denuvo and forced online crap, ideally it should be DRM free and on GoG, but in this day and age it's not happening...
I want to see your ideas.
i want lotr tw
Then get the Third Age mod and optionally submods for it.
for whuch game
Medieval 2.
i dont want to go back to tard wrangling the camera, ill wait for a warhammer mod
>i dont want to go back to tard wrangling the camera
Use Freecam
pike and shot. from the end of the hundred years' war to the end of the seven years' war.
based. I been waiting forever for a game like this and nothing. I want to have a wagon train fort fricking up moron knights
While I would love a game set in the Early Modern Period, the closest we're probably ever going to get is just playing as The Empire in Warhammer and ignoring all the fantasy units
Empire 2
But I want it to be developed by competent devs, not CA
>Total War games (or Total War clones)?
I would like to see CA trying to build their own Age of Mythology clone. But on larger scale with more factions. Albiet this pitch is harder to sell since Warhammer gave everyone advanced form of brainrot when it comes to fantasy. So yeah. Basically Troy Saga, but ... not shit and with actuall fantasy.
>What new (or old) improvements?
When it comes to gameplay, I would prever cavalry that is not dogshit Yeah, it was pretty good in older games shut up. and range not being best solution to everything. Also difficulty doing something outside of bloating AI stats.
why does warhammer cause so much anal pain
Most campaigns are boring in Warhammer.
not really. i only hated elves and brettonia
also kislev could use more units
They are, there is no incentive to play on the whole world. You usually win way earlier, the only reason to go around is for LL defeat traits and that's it for 90% of factions. You either snowball out of control during the first 20-30 turns or the campaign mechanics hinder you to do so early. The result is usually a waiting simulator.
all total wars become boring when you get strong, not a fault with wh
its clear what i meant
warhammer causes butthurt in homosexuals that dont play games and instead circlejerk about old tw mods
>all total wars become boring when you get strong
No, there is Attila or even Shogun 2 with its end time mechanic. It's way easier in Warhammer to get out of controll than in previous titles. Mostly because of magic and LL.
>No, there is Attila or even Shogun 2 with its end time mechanic
no, warhammer has the hardest lategame now with the end game crisis, you can even tick a button to have all 4 (5?) of the crisis events happen in the same campaign
it's clear you never played the game, please play more games before you try to sound smart discussing them you moronic casual frick
Not really, it's easy to cheese battles in Warhammer and it's hard to play normally once you know how to. I played all Total Wars, besides the Saga ones and Warhammer is the most boring one to me now. I prefer Three Kingdoms and Attila over it. Warhammer is easy when my first stack is finished, everything afterwards becomes a drain fast.
eh i disagree, i find it the hardest game on legendary
the others are way too easy to frick with and cheese, warhammer has a variety of shit to throw at you
i just wish the AI knew how to build settlements, but this hasnt been the case in total war ever
There's your crisis.
How hard it was, i have just no words.
Now bring even hardier video from shogun2 for prove your take.
>guy cheesing the AI means that the crisis is easy/the late game is easy
this is calling shogun shit cuz of yari spam levels of moronic
>using doomstacks is cheesing
You so moronic so it's almost wonderfull.
doomstacking like that with heroes and monsters is the oldest fricking cheesing tactic in the warhammer series you moronic frick
it's like spamming cavalry in rome, yari ashigaru in shogun
it's a cheese tactic, it invalidates your experience and ruins the game
You
>NOOO YOU CAN'T MAKE DOOMSTACKS SINCE IT BROKE THE GAME
Also you
>REEE WARHAMMER IS HARDEST TW GAME
Also you, again
>DOOMSTACKS IN WH IS EQUALLY TO CAVALRY IN ROME AND YARI ASHIGARU IN SHOGUN2
Also you
>NOOO I DON'T BRING VIDEO WHERE ASHIGARU/CAVALRY/SOMETHING ELSE JUST STAY AFK AND ENEMY DIE BUT YOU IS moronic FRICK SINCE I CAN'T PROVE MY POINT
Kekw.
I think we done here.
>you need to bring me a video of yari being overpowered, or cavalry cheesing in rome otherwise it never happened
google "yari ashigaru spam" and you will get a billion results of why it's meta, we are not having this dumbass argument again
yes, cheesing a game ruins it
yes, warhammer is the hardest game in the series, especially on legendary and some factions are straight up having sadistic starting points
yes, you can chees and exploit the AI in any game and break it, i can do that in elden ring and that wouldn't make the game shittier or easier
it would make me a moron for cheesing the game
>we are done here
yeah cuz you have nothing to say
Blame the fans. They tried to fix it twice and nobody liked that.
I liked the Rome 2 approach if the endgame being more about keeping what you have and dealing with internal issues. But apparently nobody liked that either.
>its clear what i meant
N-no. I really have no fricking idea. You interpreter the point I was trying to make in the most weird way possible.
Anon. Pray tell me. Just what in the FRICK did you meant by that?
frick off you reatrded sack of shit you could've posted this question in any one of the 10 fricking Total War threads but you just had to make the 11th thread, didn't you? Fricking wienersucker.
Are you the same guy from the other threads?
Third of those threads are for specific total war games, other are screeching autism I don't want to participate.
What I want is anons to talk about what they actually want in the new Total War games.
And people have said exactly that in most of those other threads as well as a thousand other places on the internet for years, you fricking moron. The only people that don't know what we want at this point is CA, so frick off back to your bosses and tell them to stop shitting up our only decent board.
I think sandbox nature and campaign design makes all total wars more or less like that.
What I personally would like to see, maybe not from Total War, but a clone game, would be a more story focused campaign game that has battles be like they are in Total War, but campaign portion less sandbox and more linear, that could potentially remove that issue, although game would be very different from usual Total Wars, (think Myth's narrative portions + total war style battles + army management, maybe a few branch paths on a campaign map and maybe few other mechanics).
To give the game more replayability it could still have the usual custom battle and also multiplayer of regular total war games.
cope, seethe, dilate
>cope, seethe, dilate
nah I just made another thread lol
probably make a few more today just to hammer home how spammy you fricking losers are.
Recruitment restrictions are an easy way to fix Warhammer. For example introduce races into settlements and make it impossible to recruit more than the basic units of other races. You own an Empire province as High elves, you are able to recruit basic state troops from there but no elves. Beasts should also be region bound for recruitment, the time for global recruitment should be increased as well. It simply feels inconsequential to loose units in Warhammer.
lol no
the solution is tabletop unit caps
The map is to big for unit caps, unless you implement them on an Army basis. Where certain armies or lords are only allowed to field a certain number of each unit.
yeah that's what i meant
per army caps
>implement them on an Army basis
That's generally how it is in the mods. Either unit cap per army cost (how much army is worth in gold) or just tabletop-like rules for units by putting them in categories, assigning them a value and then setting a number of how many elite or other rank of units you can have per army. That's arbitrary, but whatever. It allows to avoid elite spam. It should be an optional vanilla game feature by now (just rip off the mod, CA).
they should also allow swarm factions like skaven the ability to have more than 20 units
Agree. Every army being max twenty is dumb. You should be able to have more or less.
Most computers can handle massive battles anyway.
Yes, that could be an option too, same as unit caps mods for elite units play into that.
It could be annoying though, and harder to balance out, would probably demand for better population mechanics in settlements, but it is an option.
I agree with you, I don't understand why they do something like that in some part of the games and forget it again
Shit AI makes Total War games, as well as most RTS's, pointless. If I was in charge of any game company I would divert all funds towards AI and sack everyone involved in graphics to extend our runway before the next game. I wouldn't release any game unless I personally felt it was playing at a similar level to a human.
I'm 35 years old and I have become beyond fed up of AI having to cheat to be a challenge.
I personally move into other direction, I don't care about AI and challenge as much and want more customization, sandbox to roleplay in it since all this is is digital toy soldiers. Alternatively, good stories. And finally aesthetics that please me.
I love all those things too and in a perfect world they would be all that mattered but I can't get into games anymore because the AI is braindead unless it cheats. All these strategy games are too formulaic and because I've been playing them since I was 8 I know exactly how to go about immediately 'gitting gud'. The only way to make it fun is to purposefully handicap myself but that only goes so far and unless the game allows for it thematically (i.e. CK2 and 3 in which you can roleplay as a moron) it is massively immersion breaking. I just want to be surprised or humbled every now and then. I want to have to adapt. I need to be made to feel concerned for my safety in a way that feels organic. Without that, how can I feel a sense of fulfilment at having eventually won out in the fact of adversity? I can't. It's all very depressing. I've begun resorting to only playing games in which you're competing against yourself, like Factorio.
I'd love to see a World War 1 or World War 2 total war game
yes you can say that again
also maybe seven years' war game
I just want a TW with decent combat mechanics, no stats bloat, and where units actually rout. I also want functional AI that is not cheating/moronic.
Shogun 2 was the last decent TW. Even Empire had something going for it, despite the bugs. Everything after FOTS is 100% shit.
I couldnt care less about the setting, I would play Carebears TW if it was good.
CA has 800 employees and they wasted years and millions on Hyenas, the company is finished. They should fire all women, trannies and only keep the autists around to make a game which sells. Like Medivael 3, even Mediveal 2 HD Remastered would sell like hot bread. They could even add in DLCs for it and sell them like AoE2 does.
>Bring back the old settlement system based on population size
>Total province system death, that shit belongs in Monopoly
>Generals back to Rome levels of being great but also too precious to waste on a cav charge
>Away with special powers, that shit can eat a bullet
>An ideal setting could be early modern age
Nah. Old system was shit.
Disagree, frick sieges.
? They are very expendable in Rome 1.
It's fine in fantasy.
Nah, boring.
do what modders were trying to do
>have each faction have different govts
>rome republic
>sparta two kings
>athens democracy
and so on and so on, actual pops maybe something like DEI, have pops have wants and needs too so you have to balance between the plebs and the aristocrats
actual supply and attrition
proper skirmishing
generals have loyalty, political factions you need to balance and not that rome 2 shit where stuff didnt even matter
different client kingdoms where you can install puppets like in EB2 but properly represented
Change the scale of the world so you can have cities as units of economic/administrative abstraction working actively on the battle map.
A battle system with collision between units and individual HP for each model within a unit.
A battle system that relies on planning a strategy ahead and then slowly and neatly executing that plan, rather than asiaticclick reaction-based gameplay filled with mini abilities.
Units that are responsive to every command and don't get stuck, stand around, refuse to fire over a wall, or other moronic things.
Siege mechanics where a small garrison can defeat a much larger invading force, which is the whole point of defences.
A map of at least the whole of Europe and Asia and preferably more, with cities mapped historically like Attila.
Campaign mechanics that encourage the use of small armies, with full stacks being a rarity.
City management that is consistently weighing up trade-offs, rather than just building the economy buildings and then being showered in cash.
Rewards for holding key resources on the map like Iron or Timber.
Allies that are actually somewhat loyal and useful.
More flavour for each faction through campaign missions, architecture, music, etc.
Ability to set up new cities or trading posts.
There needs to be a much larger scale. I'm talking like 50,000 soldiers in each army at a minimum
They probably also need to address the turn based aspect of the game. It doesn't really make sense in a game centered around warfare considering how important things like supply lines, baggage trains, and orderly retreats are
>mfw only properly played a campaign in Empire and didn't even finish it but also have Rome and Medieval 2 in my Steam library, so they're still "new" to me
This is literally just because our /vg/ thread is unusable because of fantasy shits and this board has a ban on “generals”
Mods, just give us one (1) historical TW “general” thread and this problem goes away.
In fact this recent spike in threads is directly correlated to the death of the last history “genny” last week
The ban on generals is a soft one, and it makes sense, this board is fairly slow, so once once thread for game x dies it's likely to just be reposted. So somebody later should just make a new Historical Total War games thread and be done with it.
My thread is a bit more speculative and not strictly about history total wars anyway.
>waah people discuss warhammer on /vg/ i am being filtered and persecuted
what a manbaby
>no you don't understand we HAVE to spam this board because the other board won't let us 🙁
peak homosexualry.
Why don't you just split the general like the /gsg/gays did?
cuz then both generals would die
/vg/ is too fast cuz of gacha
not him btw and i think he is moronic cuz people discuss historical games constantly
he just wants a general that doesnt have anything he doesnt like
What, when did /gsg/ split?
a long time ago now, civ general or whatever it's called is where the other half is
I think /civ4xg/ was its own thing, besides maybe that Stellaris players left /gsg/ for /civ4xg/. At least that's my understanding.
yeah, hence why it's a split in a way
i have to say, i have no clue what the frick is going on in /gsg/
they keep talking to each other without quoting for some reason
Yeah, I seen it. I don't really go there much, since I only care for Crusader Kings 2 out of all Pdox games, and it's better to post on /vst/ for that one.
i made the mistake of posting about stellaris there and i discovered the split up
it was funny to say the least
Vic2 autists made their own general a couple of years ago, and later on made their own Ganker-like site altogether.
I didn't know that... What's their site?
Wh is so hard. How we even win it whbros?!
chaos dwarfs are broken thoughbeit
If you think that's bad, you should see what VC can do with Zombies.
the bug with healing? yeah i know of that
i dont know if it's fixed yet
Yeah. Mb a bit more than other wh stuff, having few dozens armies before 80 turn look like very bad joke, and their "i win" buttons is very-very sweet.
But how the frick guys dare to call wh "hard" when there's shittons of options to broke that game, and how they dare compare shigaru spam with this shit i just can't understand.
people are talking about the game without cheesing, or abusing a broken faction that is pay to win
play thorek, or that high elf dragon fricker in wh2 on legendary
try to have fun with the damn game instead of abusing bugs and exploits
warhammer is the hardest game in the series cuz of how much bs it throws at you in many situations, but it also has some of the easiest starts in the series too (chorfs, skarbrand)
i'd say wh2 is a more complete experience and you should play that
but if you hate yourself play thorek on legendary in 3
Tell me 1 (one) sane way to play without "cheesing" which is not moronic or self-limited.
>boot up warhammer 2
>play mortal empires
>jack up the game to legendary
>pick a lord you want
>experience the game
>see why people say warhammer is the hardest in the series so far
>quit
Here's your wh2.
I wipe scourge of khaine with fricking starting army.
Then before 25 turn i got sword of khaine, make doomstack of SOA with few trents and can wipe any faction by my choice.
So hard, so hard...
If you complete legendary Uesugi campaign?
I.e. not playing as player want, but playing as you want.
Kekw, again.
congrats anon, you won your first battle!
>If you complete legendary Uesugi campaign?
i have beaten every total war game on legendary
>kekw
you need to go back
>gates
>with direction from outer circle
>first battle
Kekw, again and again.
it is a minor settlement you beat
you seem so proud of it so i said congrats, want a cookie? you didn't beat the game moron sama
You didn't know where that battle, you didn't recognize that lord have 10 lvl, you didn't notice that is siege with starting army against x1.5 larger army (with better quality if we put lord and hero aside), and you ignore that losses of 20 spearmens vs 500 kills.
You just moron who think wh is hard since lack of skill and damaged brain.
winning a single battle against an AI is not what makes any total war game hard moron sama, i know this is hard for you to grasp as you keep alt tabbing to twitch to watch legendoftotalwar
>esl garbage about me being bad at games, from the guy bragging about beating a single enemy army BUT THE LORD IS LEVEL 10! WOAH!
also play without doing moronic shit like having 5 heroes and 50 archers in an army or other garbage
Historical or Fantasy, the new big game need to have new mechanics that commit statecraft to the battlefield, they need to dump this "building slot and modifiers" mechanic. Political position, orders of knight, trade, supply, religion, fortress cities vs civilian cities, traits... Don't get me wrong, I know that many of you are going to think that I'm talking of the old total war, but you are wrong. The old total war games did just a "glimpse" of what was needed. The shame is that as technology developed they dumbed down the games instead to improve the exisiting systems and add new mechanics. At the end of the day the game improved almost only "graphically" and the started to stagnate.
>The old total war games did just a "glimpse" of what was needed. The shame is that as technology developed they dumbed down the games instead to improve the exisiting systems and add new mechanics. At the end of the day the game improved almost only "graphically" and the started to stagnate.
my thoughts exactly. its a shame that at best, we got a sidegrade with the new mechanics but they were never improved upon. instead they were removed, dumbed down or replaced with something equally as shallow.
we should have had pops by now, extensive city management, deep supply mechanics, deep character management, feudal faction fighting, the needs and wants of the citizens of the kingdom, different kingdoms playing differently to how they were governed irl instead of stupid pop up events and percentage modifiers being all that differentiates the various factions
They need to redo their engine to make things play out in a functionally pleasing way. I remember being shocked at how empire was a step down from M2 in how units and their soldiers behaved, and awful sieges.
I think they need to figure out a way to make gunpowder and pikes and the individual soldiers work in flexible and convincing ways, rather than units remaining mildly flexible rectangles made of bowling pins that you smush together or get to stand in place.
They could fix melee first in M3, or get everything all at once in E2.
They might also benefit from optimising the graphics engine. Next gen should look better but also perform a lot better. And it has typically come down on the side of graphics at the expense of gameplay. The lack of moddability compared to M2 and RTW are features not bugs for them in this respect.
They could also experiment with campaign maps that abstract movement of armies more and involve a layer of strategy that's a deep game in its own right.
They should also stop making spinoffs of limited scope and appeal standalone, and treat historicals like WH1,2,3 where iterative expansions of the same game world make it more fleshed out. Eg: M3 start with just high medieval western Europe, make expansions region-focused to end up at different regions and eras combining to a greater whole. E3 could start with Europe then add the Americas, central Asia, India etc, until it's EU4 tier in regional fleshing-out.
>Eg: M3 start with just high medieval western Europe, make expansions region-focused to end up at different regions and eras combining to a greater whole
Terrible. There is a reason why I play Stainless Steel over Kingdoms expansions campaigns.
Rome "Remastered" showed that old engine can be scaled up with number of provinces and graphics even more than warscape and still run a lot smoother, no idea why they dropped it for new shitty engine.
Pike and shot, preferably set during the 30 years war, and it should be on a new engine.
Want to try Total War games, checked few titles on steam and like Empire and Napoleon aesthetics? which one to choose?
Empire have global map and naval combat (still moronic but not so bad if we didn't look at it close).
Napooran have better mechanics.
>31 posters in this completely pointless thread
Let it die, morons. Go post your boring complaints that everyone has already heard in one of the other 20 Total War threads.