Total War Attila - AD 401???

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:02 AM

The First of all, I am very glad that CA announced Total War Attila, that is how to say, the BI 2 and the BI was my favorite campaign game in Rome TW. Now
it is already available in Rome 2 - as, TW ATTILA, really appreciate that move from CA. THX them for that and wish good luck in creating the good game,
they really have some time to improve much in it

Now I have one question which as I see is some kind of error or I do not know that, but anyway - the campaign that we saw in TWITCH was about the Great Britain region and
the year that I have noticed was AD 401, but the Attila who is named in the title of the game (Total War Attila), he ruled the Hun Empire from 434 to 453,
he was not even born in 401 (we do not know precise date of his birth, but not probably in AD 401, some scholars assume AD 406 as the date of birth of Attila the Hun).

So, my question is - what is this AD 401??? where did it come from?

I think something has to be corrected. Your suggestions guys...

.

**Stavroforos** · September 25, 2014, 11:05 AM

It probably starts before Attila actually shows up, probably so he can give the player a chance to fight off the Huns rather than being caught completely with their pants down.

**Abdülmecid I** · September 25, 2014, 11:07 AM

It starts in 395 AD. 401 AD is probably just a random date, I guess.

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:12 AM

The game is about the Attila, ROme and the rest of the world around them. Also it is named as TW ATTILA, so, it is really weird to see the start date 395 or 401 or whatever except initial years of Attila's reign.

I still hope that it is mistake that was in the game and they will script it out in future.

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by The_Hibernian

It starts in 395 AD. 401 AD is probably just a random date, I guess.

where did you heard about that?

**Abdülmecid I** · September 25, 2014, 11:17 AM

They announced it during their twitch presentation, at some point in the begining.

**Undeadsloth** · September 25, 2014, 11:20 AM

The next instalment in the multi award-winning PC series that combines turn-based strategy with real-time tactics, Total War: ATTILA casts players back to 395 AD. A time of apocalyptic turmoil at the very dawn of the Dark Ages. So yeah no need for anymore discussion on the date, that comes from the actual total war page for TW: ATILLA.

**Pheidippides** · September 25, 2014, 11:23 AM

I like it. Will bring back the pending apocalypse feel of the MTW series waiting for the Mongols to arrive.

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Undeadsloth

The next instalment in the multi award-winning PC series that combines turn-based strategy with real-time tactics, Total War: ATTILA casts players back to 395 AD. A time of apocalyptic turmoil at the very dawn of the Dark Ages. So yeah no need for anymore discussion on the date, that comes from the actual total war page for TW: ATILLA.

To start the game Total War Attila without the Attila is something funny for me, I hope they will change it. Do not really think that in the game titled as Total War A t t i l a we will play without the main person of the game.
If the game is titled as TW Attila it should be about his timeframe, and not about the division on Roman Empire.

That is my opinion and really hope many will share the same view, that I hold for this moment

.

**Prof** · September 25, 2014, 11:41 AM

I guess, they want the players to establish their empires, before Attila appears, like the Mongols in Medieval 2.
If they are planning this as an own game, then I think, they shouldn't focus it on one character only anyway.

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Prof

I guess, they want the players to establish their empires, before Attila appears, like the Mongols in Medieval 2.
If they are planning this as an own game, then I think, they shouldn't focus it on one character only anyway.

That if I will chose to play with Huns and will start without Attila in 395 and will loose the game before the Attila will be born in 406? What kind of Attila Total War is this, to play without Attila,
the main character?
That is not the way we have to go. Something have to be changed in starting date. And if players want to built an empire they can do it during the Attila's reign

.

**Prof** · September 25, 2014, 11:51 AM

Perhaps the overall starting positions for the other factions are more interesting in 395 than when Attila reigned, making the campaign more interesting.

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Prof

Perhaps the overall starting positions for the other factions are more interesting in 395 than when Attila reigned, making the campaign more interesting.

Roman Empire was weak but huge and was divided in 395, the Barbarians are living in the north of the r. Rhine and r. Danube and Sassanian Empire is in the east, as well as many small nations around.
That is all. Absolutely nothing interesting

.

**Prof** · September 25, 2014, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by JERUSALEM

Roman Empire was weak but huge and was divided in 395, the Barbarians are living in the north of the r. Rhine and r. Danube and Sassanian Empire is in the east, as well as many small nations around.
That is all. Absolutely nothing interesting

.

Then consider this: Attila will be around as a general only for a limited amount of time. Depending on the scale they are using for turns per year. (I'm hoping for 4tpy), this means that if he was the king in the beginning of the campaign, he will be gone pretty soon and won't see any of the late game.

So he will be either around in the beginning, when there are only cheap units available for everyone, in the middle, when the armies are alright and nobody is really OP, or in the end, when there are huge empires that he will hardly be able to defeat.

**RexImperator** · September 25, 2014, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by JERUSALEM

he ruled the Hun Empire from 434 to 553,

.

That's pretty old for the late classical period.

**Karnil Vark Khaitan** · September 25, 2014, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by RexImperator

That's pretty old for the late classical period.

that makes him 119 years old

**JERUSALEM** · September 25, 2014, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by Prof

Then consider this: Attila will be around as a general only for a limited amount of time. Depending on the scale they are using for turns per year. (I'm hoping for 4tpy), this means that if he was the king in the beginning of the campaign, he will be gone pretty soon and won't see any of the late game.

So he will be either around in the beginning, when there are only cheap units available for everyone, in the middle, when the armies are alright and nobody is really OP, or in the end, when there are huge empires that he will hardly be able to defeat.

They have something different in mind I far as I can guess. We will see, but looking into the info all around internet I think they are not going to include Huns as a faction but rather they want to make something apocalyptic and demonic from them to keep the players stressed in late campaign game. So, this is their intrigue of the main campaign game. Still, we will see it in near future. Anyway best wishes to CA.

PS.
I have edited my first post, it was just accidental mistake 553 instead of 453