-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Medieval: Total War -- Vikings Invasion was extremely limited in terms of scope/location and only covered a small part of the Dark Ages (about the second half from a chronological perspective and a very small geographical range). It could hardly be considered to be a generally-Dark-Ages game any more than the Americas scenario for Medieval II: Total War -- Kingdoms could be considered a full-blown "New World" game.
The closest anybody has really come has been the Barbarian Invasion expansion for Rome: Total War, which (if I remember correctly) started something like mid-fourth century and ran for maybe 100-150 years, which is really more "tail-end of Late Antiquity" than anything truly Dark Ages. A good strategy game that ran from around 493 to (at the very least) 800 or 814 AD would be a great addition to the "historical strategy games" repertoire.
Cheers.
The closest anybody has really come has been the Barbarian Invasion expansion for Rome: Total War, which (if I remember correctly) started something like mid-fourth century and ran for maybe 100-150 years, which is really more "tail-end of Late Antiquity" than anything truly Dark Ages. A good strategy game that ran from around 493 to (at the very least) 800 or 814 AD would be a great addition to the "historical strategy games" repertoire.
Cheers.
It only covered the Vikings and in a very limited terrain and era. As far as Great Invasions, great promise but almost impossible to play due to bugs and defects in the game.
As far as CA they covered only the fall of the REmpire wiht Barbarian Inavasions, but not the rest of the period. You are missing the Visigoths, OstroG, Vandals, Arab invasion of Spain and Portugal, Charlemagne, the ERE(Byzantines at their greatest extent), a lot to do with a lot of possible decisions over a long period of time (478ad-1100ad).
I just think the Paradox core games shall be the games which could bring the feeling of history...╮(╯▽╰)╭
what i would like to see would be an stretch of four integrated games or the possibility of integrating four seperate games with the first having a delayed release so that a follow up can be released at 6-month intervals:
Game 1
Starting with rome and a map containing the mediterannian basin and gaul/germania. you start off as possibly a member of the patriarchs of rome or equivalent in carthage greece etc. with small realms within a fledgeling empire. with the focus being on internal politics, opening up of trade routes, monopolies on goods and empire expansion(contribution to and reward from an emperor/senate)etc. with perhaps scripted events/scenarios to maintain roughly historical sizes (punic wars, barabarian invasions, natural disasters and revolts).
Game 2: call it CK2
by using the same mechanics on a larger scale so moving out from a family in an empire/kingdom/republic to being a noble family in charge of upstart tribe. the map could be expanded to the current ck one and the timeline will begin either straight after the previous one, which could be a problem as it may result in an enormous roman empire so an alternative would be to perhaps start the game 20 years later than the previous one finished with barbarians rampaging across the empire and splitting it up. this will run until the late middle ages so perhaps a timeline of around 500 years.
Game 3: Call it EU4
map zooms out ever further and the ability to micromanage should decrease, so if the above games let you manage on a county level this would be on the duchy level to prevent silly amounts of processing power or attention. this would introduce the birth of nation states.
Game 4: up to WW1 call it viky2
i havent even begun to think about this one but the industrial revolution period would probably focus technological advances and improved living conditions, controlled through trade etc.
i have not structured it anything like it should be to persuade people why i think this would be a good idea and hope someone with more time could take this idea forward. to be able to play through european history from rome to WW1 would be amazing.
i think the most important thing would be to try and make a seamless progression from different timeperiods using different mechanics, with the successive games utilizing expanded "worlds"
edit: wow this makes no sense i will edit this when i have not got herbal medication floating around my brain
Game 1
Starting with rome and a map containing the mediterannian basin and gaul/germania. you start off as possibly a member of the patriarchs of rome or equivalent in carthage greece etc. with small realms within a fledgeling empire. with the focus being on internal politics, opening up of trade routes, monopolies on goods and empire expansion(contribution to and reward from an emperor/senate)etc. with perhaps scripted events/scenarios to maintain roughly historical sizes (punic wars, barabarian invasions, natural disasters and revolts).
Game 2: call it CK2
by using the same mechanics on a larger scale so moving out from a family in an empire/kingdom/republic to being a noble family in charge of upstart tribe. the map could be expanded to the current ck one and the timeline will begin either straight after the previous one, which could be a problem as it may result in an enormous roman empire so an alternative would be to perhaps start the game 20 years later than the previous one finished with barbarians rampaging across the empire and splitting it up. this will run until the late middle ages so perhaps a timeline of around 500 years.
Game 3: Call it EU4
map zooms out ever further and the ability to micromanage should decrease, so if the above games let you manage on a county level this would be on the duchy level to prevent silly amounts of processing power or attention. this would introduce the birth of nation states.
Game 4: up to WW1 call it viky2
i havent even begun to think about this one but the industrial revolution period would probably focus technological advances and improved living conditions, controlled through trade etc.
i have not structured it anything like it should be to persuade people why i think this would be a good idea and hope someone with more time could take this idea forward. to be able to play through european history from rome to WW1 would be amazing.
i think the most important thing would be to try and make a seamless progression from different timeperiods using different mechanics, with the successive games utilizing expanded "worlds"
edit: wow this makes no sense i will edit this when i have not got herbal medication floating around my brain
Last edited:
Paradox is pretty good at making empire building games, but not empire destruction ones (games where you lose don't seem to be very popular). so either stay away from the Fall of Rome, or make Rome unplayable, with players having their choice of invading barbarians.
In a Dark Ages game, it would not make sense to play "Rome" itself, but several factions inside Rome which try to rebuild the empire ... and, of course, barbarian tribes, christian sects, military circles ... kinda that.
A thousand years isn't quite 'a bit'.
I think it is, but only time will tell.
Welcome to Europe. =D
Did we get side-tracked? I'd like to defy other claimants in duel, to vendetta against another family, to score points for getting one of my own crowned pope, get Papal dispenses for divorce, and to get Papal blessing for my actions and claims (other than crusades).
Last edited:
Great Invasions runs from 350 to 1066. The true problem with game is that it is simply not very good.
Well, there are many great ideas in this game ... i would like seeing Phillip Thibaut making a second part.
On announcement "Paradox Prepares to Invade Cologne":
"Paradox’s internal development team will be present to demo Hearts of Iron 3 and reveal the next major project to be developed by the team."
Could it be CK2 ?
"Paradox’s internal development team will be present to demo Hearts of Iron 3 and reveal the next major project to be developed by the team."
Could it be CK2 ?
East Rome doesn't lose.
Indeed. However, it is important that the West "falls" so that there is in fact a bunch of competing successor states allowing for a so called Dark Age. If west Rome survives, it wouldn't make for much of a CK game, as Europe would be unrecognisable.