I'll list isues about NEXT RELEASES OF CREATIVE ASSEMBLY:

1)DLCs for Total War Warhammer 3:  dlcs have been not looking balanced for non chaos non empire races, and are not looking good as they seem to bring just 1 LL or zero every 6 months, this pace is unbeareable and angries fans. Up to this date only WoC and chaos got +5 LLs in a row/release. CA should start to do the same (plenty of names in lore) for all forgotten with Character Packs like: +5 LLs for bretonnia, +5 LLs for vampire counts, +5 LLs for Tomb Kings, +4 LLs for Greenskins/Hobgoblins, +4 LLs for Ogre Kingdoms scratching the barrel, +4 LLs for Wood Elves, +3 LLs for Undead Legion of Nagash, +3 LLs for Vampire Coasts, +3 LLs for Norsca... fun new choices for the forgotten. Be cautious pulling the plug before 5 or 6 years more as I see people will hate, and boycot CA forever. It's been too many years and no one should feel it ends incomplete.

2)No Mythos for Dynasties. This is a big issue because most people envision bronze age with the best of all mythologies of mankind. Bronze age without Mythos feels incomplete no matter how much expand. More than 60% of the possible players prefer to play bronze age with both: historically accurate, and a Mythos focus that makes more epic the experience.

3)Star Wars release worries me because Empire At War exists, how are they going to make superior and more complete experience? CA trend to start with Saga style of 4 factions is not looking good, it will get review bombing and if this happens will be much harder than with SoC debacle. Star War fans are very merciless fanbase. The only choice for CA is bring a remake of Empire At War expanded and updated, and begin since start with a very big release having 14 factions like Dynasties. Be careful, CA, splitting things for fans is more unbeareable than before, is dangerous...

4)40k This is the most awaited release in discord, forums, and reddit. I see this tittle being able to last for more a decade of DLC releases. Planning it very well without looking lazy and greedy: not scarce in content + not too high prices, and this will work well.

5)World War 1: Seems like a bad idea because trench gameplay is boring. I think this game should be readressed to be Late Medieval+Empire game

6)They should start to think in making: Dystopian World War 3 with crossover DLCs having the inclusion of background, factions and units from DC/Marvel/The Boys/Terminator/The Matrix/Judge Dredd/Cyberpunk 2077 DLCs

1. Meh balance in most games tends to favour the new content, especially for GWS content so seems fitting with the IP.

2. No, most of us don't have that view of it. Most wanted a historical game and have got that with a wider scope. It doesn't seem to have done that well for Troy and splitting development was a nightmare for 3K.

3. Is only a rumour at this point with nothing reliable to base it on.

4. Same as above.

5. Same as above.

6. That's not really practical, especially with how many different companies those IPs are owned by and the hoops they'd have to jump through for it and lack of value for either company.

What worries me the most is CA relying only on reddit and forum for customer input. In the past, some fans said they wanted a viking TW so CA put out ToB. Flopped. Then, fans also said they wanted Bronze age, cool. CA gave Troy & Pharaoh. Flopped.

CA should really go Global. Stop making historical titles set in Europe & North Africa for a change. Look at America, Central Asia, South Asia, the middle east, greater east asia (including south east asia) for a change. Does it happen that most people could be fed up with games like TW set in the same geography for like 90% of their historical product line-up.

What worries me the most is that the success of Warhammer and failure of Pharaoh (even though most players would agree this was CA's fault) is going to make CA think true historical titles are bad investments. 

​

united84#8186 wrote:

What worries me the most is CA relying only on reddit and forum for customer input. In the past, some fans said they wanted a viking TW so CA put out ToB. Flopped. Then, fans also said they wanted Bronze age, cool. CA gave Troy & Pharaoh. Flopped.

Troy did not flop, it made close to 30 million USD in revenue in the first year thanks to the Epic deal and was so successful with DLC sales that CA extended support with the Mythos and Rhesus & Memnon DLC. Pharaoh was driven not by CA listening to people on reddit (which was and is dominated by the Warhammer crowd 90% of the time) but by the assumption that they could repeat the success of  Troy without the base game being free on Epic. 

As for people being fed up with the European setting the fact that Manor Lords sold 2 million copies in a matter of weeks suggests otherwise. With the last Total War to be set in Europe releasing back in 2014 it is also hard to see how people have grown tired of that particular setting when we have not even had a modern Total War set in Europe. 

Empire at War is what? 20 years old at this point? It wouldn't even run on my PC anymore. It also just focuses on the OT and not on the Clone Wars era which is much better suited for a TW game. 

So a Star Wars TW game is the one project I'm mostly hyped for (my forum name should give that away). Let me command the 501st and destroy endless Hprdes of Clankers CA! 

​

Jarms48#7854 wrote:

What worries me the most is that the success of Warhammer and failure of Pharaoh (even though most players would agree this was CA's fault) is going to make CA think true historical titles are bad investments. 

Pharao wouldn't have flopped if it would be like Dynasties from day 1. 

​

Captain_Rex#1635 wrote:

Pharao wouldn't have flopped if it would be like Dynasties from day 1. 

We'll have to wait and see how the player count changes with the update to see. I expect it will be better than original release but I'd expect it to still be towards the worst performing of the TW titles.

​

Captain_Rex#1635 wrote:

​

Jarms48#7854 wrote:

What worries me the most is that the success of Warhammer and failure of Pharaoh (even though most players would agree this was CA's fault) is going to make CA think true historical titles are bad investments. 

Pharao wouldn't have flopped if it would be like Dynasties from day 1. 

The  "CA should only make Warhammer" fanboys and the Medieval 3 fanatics would have still have hate the game just as they hated 3 Kingdoms and Troy and with CA's poor reputation at the time that Pharaoh was revealed enough of upset ordinary fans would have joined in the hate fest just to went their anger. When the grifters on youtube saw that there was money to be made the videos with hatemongering and disinformation would have start rolling out. Once the SoC debacle hit things would have gotten nearly as bad or as bad as they did in real life because people would have targeted Pharaoh to send a message. 

You would still have had all the claims that Pharaoh was just a Saga and that it was really meant to be a Troy DLC. With the Aegean factions included from start people would have said that CA was making people pay for Troy content twice. The minor factions would have been evidence that CA was just cheap and greedy and so on.  There would always have been an excuse to hate on Pharaoh. 

For Pharaoh to get a neutral reception you would have to do a lot more than just have it launch with Dynasties levels of content. You would need to remove the resentment that was festering and that requires an alternate reality where CA did not screw up the launch of Warhammer 3 and the DLC pricing and content.  

Still think they should do an IP less (So cheaper) Fantasy game, like making a full/Grand Mythology game with the Pantheon serving as the 'races' and the different deity as the Lords.
They would be the closest to the tech they already have while still being 'more' than Historical games (which personally have failed to interest me for quite a while.

​

Ekix#9944 wrote:

I'll list isues about NEXT RELEASES OF CREATIVE ASSEMBLY:

1)DLCs for Total War Warhammer 3:  dlcs have been not looking balanced for non chaos non empire races, and are not looking good as they seem to bring just 1 LL or zero every 6 months, this pace is unbeareable and angries fans. Up to this date only WoC and chaos got +5 LLs in a row/release. CA should start to do the same (plenty of names in lore) for all forgotten with Character Packs like: +5 LLs for bretonnia, +5 LLs for vampire counts, +5 LLs for Tomb Kings, +4 LLs for Greenskins/Hobgoblins, +4 LLs for Ogre Kingdoms scratching the barrel, +4 LLs for Wood Elves, +3 LLs for Undead Legion of Nagash, +3 LLs for Vampire Coasts, +3 LLs for Norsca... fun new choices for the forgotten. Be cautious pulling the plug before 5 or 6 years more as I see people will hate, and boycot CA forever. It's been too many years and no one should feel it ends incomplete.

2)No Mythos for Dynasties. This is a big issue because most people envision bronze age with the best of all mythologies of mankind. Bronze age without Mythos feels incomplete no matter how much expand. More than 60% of the possible players prefer to play bronze age with both: historically accurate, and a Mythos focus that makes more epic the experience.

3)Star Wars release worries me because Empire At War exists, how are they going to make superior and more complete experience? CA trend to start with Saga style of 4 factions is not looking good, it will get review bombing and if this happens will be much harder than with SoC debacle. Star War fans are very merciless fanbase. The only choice for CA is bring a remake of Empire At War expanded and updated, and begin since start with a very big release having 14 factions like Dynasties. Be careful, CA, splitting things for fans is more unbeareable than before, is dangerous...

4)40k This is the most awaited release in discord, forums, and reddit. I see this tittle being able to last for more a decade of DLC releases. Planning it very well without looking lazy and greedy: not scarce in content + not too high prices, and this will work well.

5)World War 1: Seems like a bad idea because trench gameplay is boring. I think this game should be readressed to be Late Medieval+Empire game

6)They should start to think in making: Dystopian World War 3 with crossover DLCs having the inclusion of background, factions and units from DC/Marvel/The Boys/Terminator/The Matrix/Judge Dredd/Cyberpunk 2077 DLCs

I particularly agree with point 2, RE: Mythos. Pharaoh is missing a lot at the moment without it. 

​

davedave1124#4773 wrote:

I think people need to understand the difference to what someone believes will happen in respect to what they want to happen.

Let’s ignore that despite the turn around it’s still not a big seller and let’s not forget, that the staff are actually saying higher management has 0 interest in historical.

Let’s also not devolve and over simply this issue into historical Vs fantasy because that makes 0 sense, there’s plenty of crossover, for one I started with historical. Don’t get me wrong, I’d like to see historical do well but, apart from 3K in terms of short term, there’s been little success.

Historical May well be taking a back seat, unless the limited success of Pharaoh has somehow inspired the devs to relook at the situation.

I'd be fine with that. Pharao Dynasties will fix my historic TW needs for a while. SO the next titles could be Star Wars, LotR and 40K.