I agree with you re Troy vs. Wilusa. It is a bit of a weird decision, but I guess that since CA is taking on such a massive undertaking with the map expansion that it is easier to simply reuse Total War Troy assets in the Aegean world of Pharaoh. I was personally hoping to see a post-Troy Aegean ruled by the heirs of Agamemnon (with an incoming Dorian invasion in conjunction with the Sea Peoples' invasions), but that might have required too much effort to research and design. 

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

I agree with you re Troy vs. Wilusa. It is a bit of a weird decision, but I guess that since CA is taking on such a massive undertaking with the map expansion that it is easier to simply reuse Total War Troy assets in the Aegean world of Pharaoh. I was personally hoping to see a post-Troy Aegean ruled by the heirs of Agamemnon (with an incoming Dorian invasion in conjunction with the Sea Peoples' invasions), but that might have required too much effort to research and design. 

Totally agree.

I have mixed feelings about how Troy and Mycenae will be integrated, but in the end it’s a massive free update, and I understand there’s only so much time and effort they can put into the game 

I had speculated in the past that CA would set the Aegean “post-Trojan War” based on the Sea People’s Trojan Horse building description (which implies the Trojan War is over). 

Still, I love the Iliad/Trojan War, and seeing as how the more legendary/mythological units from TW Troy won’t be getting ported to TW Pharaoh (tbd on Amazonian cav units), I think CA’s approach is still fine, albeit slightly less interesting.  (I still expect Dorian’s as the land invaders for the Mycenaeans)

Greeks (Achaeans) called Troy "Ilion", "Ilios" or "Troia" (meaning Sun; thats why we read the Iliad).

The word Ilion was proably pronuncen Wilion in archaic Greek, so its the same.

Troy = Wilusa.

Yeah, it's the same so why not use Wilusa instead to make it more authentic?
Why not make Kukkunni(real person) instead of Priam(fiction)?

​

Tater#4412 wrote:

I had speculated in the past that CA would set the Aegean “post-Trojan War” based on the Sea People’s Trojan Horse building description (which implies the Trojan War is over). 

Still, I love the Iliad/Trojan War, and seeing as how the more legendary/mythological units from TW Troy won’t be getting ported to TW Pharaoh (tbd on Amazonian cav units), I think CA’s approach is still fine, albeit slightly less interesting.  (I still expect Dorian’s as the land invaders for the Mycenaeans)

Yeah it's a bit weird to me because I was also left with the initial impression that Pharaoh takes place in a post-Trojan War atmosphere. I feel that this new update is retconning Pharaoh in v various aspects to make development more simplified. At least from my point of view there seems to be a disconnect between the idea behind original factions based around well developed characters (Tasuret, Irsu, etc.) and the upcoming "Mycenae," "Troy," and "Babylon."

I hope that this update won't make Total War Troy (one of my favorite games) obsolete in any fashion. The family tree aspect gives me hope that we will still see a post-Homeric Greece with an eventual Dorian invasion in Pharaoh.

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

​

Tater#4412 wrote:

I had speculated in the past that CA would set the Aegean “post-Trojan War” based on the Sea People’s Trojan Horse building description (which implies the Trojan War is over). 

Still, I love the Iliad/Trojan War, and seeing as how the more legendary/mythological units from TW Troy won’t be getting ported to TW Pharaoh (tbd on Amazonian cav units), I think CA’s approach is still fine, albeit slightly less interesting.  (I still expect Dorian’s as the land invaders for the Mycenaeans)

Yeah it's a bit weird to me because I was also left with the initial impression that Pharaoh takes place in a post-Trojan War atmosphere. I feel that this new update is retconning Pharaoh in v various aspects to make development more simplified. At least from my point of view there seems to be a disconnect between the idea behind original factions based around well developed characters (Tasuret, Irsu, etc.) and the upcoming "Mycenae," "Troy," and "Babylon."

I hope that this update won't make Total War Troy (one of my favorite games) obsolete in any fashion. The family tree aspect gives me hope that we will still see a post-Homeric Greece with an eventual Dorian invasion in Pharaoh.

For me TW Troy will not become obsolete.  That game does not require it's turns to be tied to years, since the game IS the Iliad being preformed by Homer (the narrator).  Basically, no matter how many turns it takes the player to complete a campaign, from turn 1 to the last turn, that timespan equals the 10 years the war took.

TW Troy also offers a focused campaign, centered entirely on the Iliad version of how the war went.  This focus increases the the scale of the campaign map, even though the scope is more narrow when compared to TW Pharaoh.  

I also prefer "Truth Behind the Myth" in TW Troy, as I find the Mythos too "Warhammery".  The Iliad was epic and legendary in it's narrative, so the Historical mode just doesn't sit right with me.  In contrast, TW Pharaoh is a historical game, and I wouldn't want any "Truth Behind the Myth" or "Mythos" aspects from TW Troy to be ported over.

Bottom Line:  TW Troy offers that legendary, narrow focus campaign allowing the player to experience Homer's Iliad in a Total War setting.  TW Pharaoh is a larger scoped game, focusing on historical narratives surrounding the Bronze Age collapse throughout the entire Near East Bronze Age.  Because of these differences, both games remain of value and not obsolete to me.