Is TW series becoming stale?

[Roboute Guilliman]

This game is adding a lot new features in the mix. Sorry its more than just flying units omg. Ridiculous thread.

[Taskeen]

The answer to the OP's question is Yes. TW series has entered a slow decline. Incline is a thing of the past. Simplification is the Future.

[DecayWolf]

Thread's aside, I would love a deeper economical and diplomatic system.

[Ciruelo]

Rome add 3D engine... and? all games of that period did that, not a merit of CA at all. I can understand the nostalgy for being young and worryless and go home to play some RomeTW or Medieval2, but those games are far worse than Attila and will be far far worse than Warhammer, that's for sure. Nostalgy is a powerful reason to prefer old things against new. I still today have fun playing PS1 or Nintendo64 and I cannot have fun with most of new games, that doesn't mean they are worse, it's just nostalgy.

[Lionheart11]

Apart from Teen gazing meaningless graphics, the series has failed to evolve at all!, I'm mean the basics is 10 years old, the old engine was actually better.

[CK23]

Stale? It's sad man. People aren't giving this game a chance, and by chance, I mean buying it and playing it. It's not TWC, it's everything really. The Information Age has destroyed our chances of trying something and really investing ourselves into it. We see it with MMOs, theres no "mystery" behind things anymore once its done once, its on YouTube or Reddit how to beat it. It's sad but its not assigned to a certain game or anything.

Will WTW be the GREATEST TW ever? No, probably not. Will it be fresh? Yes. New? Yes. It'll be literally everything aside from what you've said. I've since migrated over to Reddit since TWC frustrates me when I come here but nevertheless this place was my first TW home. These kind of threads often just rub people the wrong way instead of bringing them into the fold with an actual discussion. NEGATIVE NEGATIVE NEGATIVE without relenting is a problem. Regardless, I think people should be happy about WTW because it's their testbed for A LOT OF NEW STUFF that has already proven that somethings might work, something might not work.

It's pretty clear that the community backlash from the new type of sieges, that was met with both hope and dismay, will probably lead them to make sieges much more full in the next WTW game and the next historical title. Let's be real, I'd rather them mess up a fantasy setting with new mechanics then a historical game because god-forbid that happened again, I think the collective TW would riot. The RP elements of the game are going to be awesome and something that the next historical title can really benefit from, and if all points are correct, we'll be seeing a Med III sometime in the near future.

[Renown]

What else do you think they could even add in.

I think the next biggest thing they could add in is a single unit control. Like you can with some artillery units. Other than that they have pretty much covered all battle aspects, on land and sea.

Oh look, someone who wasn't even a part of the mod scene during the hey-days is saying they can't add anything else in.

I won't begin with pointing out how absolutely stupid that statement is, I'll point out we could go to saying how about adding some things BACK in?

Like archer units that actually work, AI that has actually progressed since 2006... cavalry charges that has weight, mass, and cohesion... or how about the ridiculous fight-lock system which essentially was a huge step BACKWARDS (to... days where Shogun didn't exist) in terms of More than one unit vs another?

What a joke. And you are a content director?

You remind me of people who said "nothing new can be invented" in the early 1900's...

Damn right it can't when creativity is being stifled by corporate interests. I lurked on this site for four years until I had something to contribute and I can say this site used to push CA into making better games, now it's just marketing and advertising and accepting whatever they receive.

[CK23]

Oh look, someone who wasn't even a part of the mod scene during the hey-days is saying they can't add anything else in.

I won't begin with pointing out how absolutely stupid that statement is, I'll point out we could go to saying how about adding some things BACK in?

Like archer units that actually work, AI that has actually progressed since 2006... cavalry charges that has weight, mass, and cohesion... or how about the ridiculous fight-lock system which essentially was a huge step BACKWARDS (to... days where Shogun didn't exist) in terms of More than one unit vs another?

What a joke. And you are a content director?

You remind me of people who said "nothing new can be invented" in the early 1900's...

Damn right it can't when creativity is being stifled by corporate interests. I lurked on this site for four years until I had something to contribute and I can say this site used to push CA into making better games, now it's just marketing and advertising and accepting whatever they receive.

I'd calm down with the insults, might end up with a warning, as you should.

AND here we go. Adding things back, well let me respond to you sire:

1) Archer units that work? From everything I've seen with WTW, archers are pretty effective in both bow, crossbows and firearms.

2) AI has gotten better, remember the whole "Accept or else I attack" without anything else? At leas they propose things that make sense for a majority of the time. Base game and not, I've played both have modders made it better? For damn sure, but thats the whole point of mods is to change the game experience.

3) Cavalry...have you viewed WTW's cav? Probably the best cav system I've seen yet.

4) Combat fight-lock was removed.

[Renown]

I'm not insulting him, and I have a CoC to rely on. Calling someone's statements stupid is not an insult.

I'm not even talking about diplomatic AI... but combat AI, I guess I could have specified. - From everything you've seen, that's a good point because on the videos where they've had bugs apparent... those videos are no longer viewable.


R2TW's cavalry looked awesome in videos, and the limited playthroughs we saw. Wasn't so awesome at release.

I was unaware combat fight-lock was removed for this game, that is indeed a plus.

[CK23]

I'm not insulting him, and I have a CoC to rely on. Calling someone's statements stupid is not an insult.

I'm not even talking about diplomatic AI... but combat AI, I guess I could have specified. - From everything you've seen, that's a good point because on the videos where they've had bugs apparent... those videos are no longer viewable.


R2TW's cavalry looked awesome in videos, and the limited playthroughs we saw. Wasn't so awesome at release.

I was unaware combat fight-lock was removed for this game, that is indeed a plus.

You never know these days, some people need the safe space.

Really? I wasn't a fan of R2TW's cavalry truth be told, everything I've seen with WTW's, it looks good. It's got weight and different cav's have different weight and it shows.

It was removed, and its a M2TW system.

I've seen some of the "bugs" and quite frankly, as much as I expect not see bugs with a game that was pushed back a month, I expect there to be some. If they aren't corrected, thats where I'll agree and we'll have agreement. If they are fixed, I'll be happy.

[C.Maximus]

I've loved total war since Shogun 1 and have to say Medieval 2 was my favorite till I really got into Attila. Attila has some features most people ignore like a working nomad system. The Nomad system is badass and I do not know why anyone as commented on it. It is a new feature that was needed. Maybe I am a sucker for the dark ages but Attila kept me entertained for a long time and every time I get tired of it a new and improved mod comes out covering a new century in that time period.

They had a trade system where resources made a difference but I do not know why they ditched it. In shogun 2 you could only build cav if you had horses. Only have geisha if you had silk. ect ect... so if your only source of horses was through trade you had best keep that ally or take his lands. Bringing this back would be fun.

Diplomacy is pretty good in Attila IMO and with Charlemagne and the war weariness it has made it even better. People say how Med 2 was so advanced.. When was the last time a military alliance lasted more then 5 turns if you shared borders. I have had friends in Attila that last me the entire game if I treat them right.

Then when I was just about to get tired of Attila Hellenika comes out for Rome 2 Wrath of Sparta and now my girlfriend was like "You buy another game? you stayed up till 4 am every night this week"... "No babe.. just another mod.. just another mod" as I reread Thucydides and stroke the beard of my 1 and a half foot marble carved statue of Sokrates my buddy brought me back from Greece. Anyways.. total war is far from stale.

Warhammer sounds nice but only because I get to play the Dwarves. I would rather have another historical release especially in like Waring States China.. Why did they not partner up with Koei or something and give us Lu bu and Guan Yuo and Cao Cao!? Oh well.. Dwarves and orks will have to do.

[LestaT]

I have this feeling. I think the latest major changes to the franchise were Rome 1 with it's 3D engine and EMpire with its naval battles. All games after that didn't add much to the series apart from setting. I can't stop thinking about Call of Duty and Battlefield analogy. I don't feel an urge to buy and play Warhammer TW.

They could do much more with the series. They could bring a new engine. They could redo diplomacy completely. They could revitalize the series. And yet this latest game is nothing new but the setting with "flying units omg".

As far as I remember, each new games always bring out something new.

If you find the game stale now, then I guess it's time to step back and find other games just like I stop playing after AOE 2 because I found AOE 3 stale.

Never look back.

After all, a game may be very good and may be very bad but in the end it's up to the individual.

Anyway, Warhammer is the first TW game build on 64 bit. Now I do'nt know whether it's something good, or something bad, or nothing at all, but I don't think it's not something that can be considered new.

[MrOuija]

Oh look, someone who wasn't even a part of the mod scene during the hey-days is saying they can't add anything else in.

I won't begin with pointing out how absolutely stupid that statement is, I'll point out we could go to saying how about adding some things BACK in?

Like archer units that actually work, AI that has actually progressed since 2006... cavalry charges that has weight, mass, and cohesion... or how about the ridiculous fight-lock system which essentially was a huge step BACKWARDS (to... days where Shogun didn't exist) in terms of More than one unit vs another?

What a joke. And you are a content director?

You remind me of people who said "nothing new can be invented" in the early 1900's...

Damn right it can't when creativity is being stifled by corporate interests. I lurked on this site for four years until I had something to contribute and I can say this site used to push CA into making better games, now it's just marketing and advertising and accepting whatever they receive.

These criticisms are mostly true about Attila, but almost not at all about WTW. There are dozens of videos and streams around already, see for yourself.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I don't really understand this line of reasoning. I mean, yes, I do want new things in Total War, that would be amazing. I want it to be a trade simulator on par with Victoria II. I want diplomacy to be an entire game in and of itself. I want a world map.

But this is a series. You know what it is, you know how it plays, you know what's going to happen in the next installment. It's like asking why Call of Duty doesn't include an RTS campaign mode, or why the Sims doesn't let you play FPS multiplayer deathmatches, or why Europa Universalis doesn't have 3-D battles.

They aren't innovating strategy games, they are innovating Total War games. Magic, flying units, heroic generals, regional occupation, giant units, and the entire fantasy setting, a trilogy of games that will combine to form a single, giant campaign... these are all completely new things for Total War.

I don't disagree with the feeling behind your complaints. I would love a better trade system, better diplomacy, better empire management. I want to see populations in my empire that are different cultures, I want to see diplomats that have to learn a language before they can interact with a rival empire. But Total War has literally never even attempted to portray any of these things. That's not what Total War is about. Total War is closer to Civilization than it is to Paradox, and it always has been.

A game with the features that you and I want would be awesome, but this game is not that game. This game was never intended to be that game. I don't think your personal wishlist of features being absent is a valid or fair criticism towards the game

[Bulk]

Maybe it's the audience of TW games. Conservative, not being appreciative of changes. British CA is getting it and that's what it provides.

[Jeicker the Bastard]

I don't understand why are some people so full on blaming a game for something that it never was. Creative Assembly doesn't make Europa Universalis games much like Paradox doesn't make Total War games. I guess, yes, they could try and make it more complex and all but again, they never were about that and to be fair I don't think they need to.

And to be fair, they DID make a different TW game. I mean, in a few days a Total War game is coming out and for the first time we have a fantasy setting so I don't know where this "TW series becoming stale" is coming from. Saying CA isn't making the game that some of you want is one thing, saying they're not making the game that we as a community want is narcissist and unfair for the rest of us. As far as I'm concerned, I'm getting exactly what I want and I'm quite happy about it.

[simplemind07]

Since ive been playing the first rome, my personal opinion its hasnt but improved little by little with each title. Now with flying units, single units, and more i say its progress, like other said this is a series. And in my opinion vanilla MTW 2 was not all that great, it was the mods and overhauls that made it great. Now if you compare vanilla MTW 2 with the tw games after, they did improve in vanilla states and id give it some props for it.

[EternalSilence]

They should have made a NEW MELEE orientated game engine, instead of that warscape 'ranged' engine that was created when Empire launched.
To much 1vs1 combat instead of cohort vs cohort rampage.

[geala]

Any game becomes stale after a certain time.

I think CA does something new with the fantasy setting, making the battles quite different from historical ones. And such stupid unrealistic features like cavalry with impact letting people fly through the air are suddenly acceptable.

Maybe in the coming history games they will concentrate on better campaigns, I really hope so. I spend much more time on the campaign map in any TW game than in battles. They could greatly improve economy and diplomacy. Attila is a very good game already, sadly it does not get the attention it deserves. I hesitated long to play it (till good mods appeared like FotE) but it's the best of the series.

I played TW since MTW, it had great battles but a terrible campaign, RTW was a breakthrough for the campaign but only playable with mods (EB for example), M2TW I never got warm with, it's only good for the expansions like America, ETW was great because of the setting (and at the end acceptable with mods), NTW I skipped, S2TW was the peak of boredom for me, R2TW was bad in the beginning and great after patching and with mods (DeI for example) and TW:A is even better (with mods, I never play a TW game without mods).

I'm not a Warhammer fan but after watching lots of videos and reading threads I finally preordered TW:W because it's a fresh setting and deserves a try, and modding seems possible to a certain degree.

[Evan MF]

I find the franchise stale purely because of its rotten core. The battle experience has never recovered since the incarnation of Warscape / TW3 / Empire TW engine (whatever you want to call it). I don't come to Total War for a deep campaign, I have clocked 100s of hours into Paradox games for that. A good campaign should be a mere bonus on top of the unique offering that the Total War series has created, which is a battalion-based, war-game style historical (or quasi-historical in the case of Warhammer) battles.

I would only truly get back into Total War if they introduced a new engine that made an attempt at realistic unit physics, making the player focus on grappling with plausible forces at work during a real battle, e.g. projectile physics that are affected proportionally by wind and weather, that require the player to adjust angle of fire, e.g. the crucial role that momentum should play with heavy cavalry, making the player aim for maximum velocity charges, but avoid charging down a too steep incline e.g. integrating weapon types into the physics engine so that certain weapons such as pikes actually physically disrupt a unit instead of giving them a hidden 'debuff' because they have the 'weak against pikes' trait, or whatever, e.g. making heavy infantry push back light infantry, not because they have been programmed to 'walk backwards' during melee, but because every individual heavy infantryman is physically shoving his opposite man backwards, causing an aggregate compression on the light unit which is relieved by a backwards movement; a focus these sorts of mechanics, opposed to adopting features that promote a predictable micro-management experience which many games in RTS have gone down: increasingly 'special ability'/buff focused and decreasingly about unit manoeuvring and unit positioning/integrity.

I'm just about at the point where I'm looking for a new developer to step in and take on this mantle, as it doesn't look very likely at all that CA will go down an authentic battle route. It looked promising during the RTW/M2TW days, it wasn't perfect, but the core battle experience was really solid and felt like it was trying to mimic real physics, but they deviated from where I perceived the franchise to be heading, so I'm largely done with the series at this point I think.