The Painful Truth About Medieval 3 Total War

[@Ancient_Hoplite]

The reason historical fans loved historical battles was because you could use tactics and units that made sense to the era. Battles were slower and battlefield tactics and formations could be used. Fantasy is more about overpowered abilities, lords, heroes, magic, army abilities and matching up units against the unit they counter. You can't really use formations (spells will wreck you), battles are over in seconds and the amount of damage dished out in those seconds is insane. It takes the joy out of marching your army in battle formation ready to enact your chosen tactics. Refused left flank, false retreat, weakened centre, overloaded flank, you can't really do that in fantasy as much as in historical. I love Warhammer and played a lot of hours but I love historical too for different reasons. Going back to medieval 2 and watching a prepared charge of heavy knights is just glorious.

[@stefankatsarov5806]

Battle length has been low for a long period, averadge battle time in Rome 2 is 5:30min.

[@54032Zepol]

​@@stefankatsarov5806you gotta play on harder difficulty than just very easy, I've played battles in Rome 2 that lasted a solid 20 minutes because it was an actual siege! And not some lame climb a wall mechanic like in Warhammer.

[@kieranb7582]

I would say there is a geniune cry for Empire 2 before Medieval 3. A game ranging from the English Civil War to the dawn of Victoria with a map to match that scope would be ambitious enough to intrigue those that have turn their backs to CA

[@peterw.5700]

I personally like the scale of empire and the growing settlements but the total war battle Formular doesn't fit very well with gunpowder heavy time periods because a lot of tactical depth of flanking your enemy and preserving stamina is lost when everyone is just shooting at each other. Also most units in empire total war feel kind of the same because they are either cavalry units that are really too weak to do much except killing arty and running units down skirmishers and grenadiers that feel weak because their unit size is too small or line infantry and artillery which in my opinion are the only units that really matter when one tries to win a battle. There is no tech that unlocks a very strong unit which one could strive for all units that really matter are available from the start of the game. The only techs that are game changing are better bayonets cannister shot and fire by rank. Compared to other more melee focused total wars this is just really shallow. But I'd play empire 2 and am honestly starving for a historical total war that isnt taking place during the bronze age haha (I hate the bronze age setting it's probably visually and unit variety wise the dullest time period there is) Shogun 2 did gunpowder pretty well though I'm just more of a Eurocentric guy

[@chainz983]

id rather have Medieval 3 over Empire 2 tbh

[@mrsaybassteeuh3071]

I mean English fans would like your idea. There are many different eras that are more interesting and fight more kingodms and cultures.

[@kalaegambol7195]

Its crazy that there is beef between historical fans and Fantasy fans

[@Turin-MasterofFate]

Becuase its not fantasy its warhammer.

[@geordiewalker2102]

If it was some actual decent fantasy like Lord of the Rings I wouldn't mind so much, but it is the most juvenile and belligerent fantasy world there is so fuck warhammer and fuck creative assembly but I reserve the biggest fuck you to games workshop and their shitty business model that rots everything it touches.

[@kapitankapital6580]

​@@geordiewalker2102 Lmfao seethe harder nerd

[@LordBurgerofFriesland]

It isn't even Warhammer's fault, it's just poor game design. I like Warhammer, but, I could never get into the TW: Warhammer games. It's less war and more confused mass brawls with ability spam where tactics are an afterthought, and that design philosophy has carried over into the new titles as well. The Beginning of the End Times mod for Medieval 2 really is proof that Warhammer works when made in an engine where the battles function well.

[@Darthvegeta8000]

I enjoy both historical and fantasy. I love the Warhammer IP and I like the historical titles of the past. They were my first love. (history degree) It feels like the console war in part. Elitism and snobbery. While at the same time all attention has gone to milking the warhammer fanbase while completely neglecting the historical fans.

[@armenrastgouian2988]

1) Historical Medieval 3 2) Game of Thrones fantasy 3) Lord of the rings fantasy 4) Historical empire That is all

[@ArghastOfTheAlliance]

I'd add WarCraft fantasy as well.

[@LeonZakin]

i agree if on the fourth you mean empire 2

[@diobrando2160]

Isn't Three Kingdoms based off the mythologized version, rather than an actual historical game?

[@realtomic]

Two separate modes built into one game, the fantasy option is better bc it’s more fleshed out. The regular mode is unfortunately very bland. That isn’t to say there aren’t cool moments, and I know a lot of people like that game. The diplomatic options in it are probably one of the best in the series for example. Campaign wise, it’s pretty good, battle wise however it kinda depends what you’re looking for.

[@cynicalpsycho5574]

That was a really good vid mate! I agree with a lot of your points and count myself firmly in the historical camp. I love Warhammer but that's done they have 3 with immortal empires why do the fantasy only fans not want anyone to get anything new? CA isn't going to remove Warhammer from your library to make medieval 3 but that's how some of those people act. I've pretty much been playing Rome 2 divede et Empera to scratch the historical itch. But I want Knights!

[@realtomic]

Warhammer is a great example of doing a series right, and expanding a good game consistently (for the most part) - what’s crazy is that some, maybe a lot, of warhammer players didn’t come from the historical ranks, so haven’t grown up with the series. That’s why I think LOTR would be a great game to unite the series divide between the fan bases.

[@kkyrezis]

Play 1212 mod on Attila

[@craftingcameron8636]

Most of the fan base still wants Med 3 soo

[@stefankatsarov5806]

Med2 was made by a studio from Australia, they where not allowed to do any totall war games ever since ( i think they worked on Alien Isolation ). Empire was a mess from the begining, the management ruined it before it started even, Napoleon was to Empire what Attila was to Rome2. A halfbaked game smaller in scope but in the same tiem that was meant to fix the mistakes of the previous game. I woud say that Napoleon was not a good game ( it had alot of the problems of Empire), but since it was bettter than Empire and still made you feel like you are part of the period ( the battles ) it is remembered in good light.

[@rodrigomachado5291]

My dream-come-true would be a game set in Early Middle Ages game like the Viking Invasion expansion for Medieval 1.

[@kssrr]

I don‘t fully get the hate towards Rome 2; while it had a botched release, a lot of work was put in afterwards & it turned out a really good game (at least in my opinion). It also has far more players than Troy and Pharaoh combined at all times, according to steamdb. I also don‘t get how Attila is then considered a decent game - it could have easily been a Rome 2 DLC, still has performance problems even on recent hardware and has around half the players of rome 2 most of the time. The only cool mechanic it introduced were the horde factions. I guess Rome 1 Nostalgia is overwhelming for some people, but if we take a step back I think Rome 2 still belongs to the better games in the series

[@winndypops]

Really interesting stuff dude, I think you nailed all of the 'musts' for a new Medieval Total War. I really do not know if we will get it, or to be honest even if I want it. Being such a mad fan of Med 2 I'd love it if we just got a sort of remaster, just a stability fix and some way to let the modders go wild, removing the various caps and all, I'd happily pay for it just to see what Third Age, Reforged and DAC could do. I just do not believe that CA in its current state could create a Med 3 that I actually wanted to play. I remember the hype for Rome 2, with how impressive Shogun 2 was I was sure that CA would deliver something incredible, hit my friend group like a train when it actually came out...

[@realtomic]

I had pretty much the same experience as you when Rome 2 came out, terrible, terrible experience. A medieval 2 remastered would be really interesting, but I wonder if it would be better than the current mods we already have.. It could allow modders to use the newer platform to make better mods though, a lot like RTR Imperial Surrectum has done with the remaster

[@winndypops]

That is my main hope yes, right now many mods are limited due to some quirks with the old system, for Third Age Reforged they are trying to add 3 new factions but to make space they must remove units from other factions because they are already at a cap. I would just love to get a Medieval 2 remaster that tries its best to remain true to the original game but just giving a smoother experience with fresh modding potential.

[@wojtek1582]

Why Total War Pharoah is a disaster? I didn't play it, but I was suspicious it will be hard to make it interesting as military in those times wasn't as sophisticated as in the Roman times not mentioning medieval era, Sengoku Jidai or in Warhammer universe.

[@winzyl9546]

Sophisticated in what way? That makes no sense.

[@wojtek1582]

@@winzyl9546 More different unit types, more advanced technology, different tactics. There was for example no cavalry in the Bronze Age - only chariots. No elephant units, no crossbows, no gun powder, no long pike units, much worse armor and so on, an so on.

[@realtomic]

I think the period choice was one of the major factors the game didn’t take off, but I also think that with Troy which took a similar approach, the characters are a lot more recognizable. Achilles etc. The Bronze Age doesn’t help as you said with technology, the advancements are minimal. The real reason it failed was the original $60 price tag, and the fact it was originally going to be a expansion of Troy. They were originally going to kinda do an expansion to the Troy Campaign Map (I think) and then have another expansion into Mesopotamia, which is where the Assyrians and other factions will a little more eastern culture are located. So the idea is you would’ve had Greece, Egypt and Assyria all in one map, all with different objectives and a great end game where all the surviving factions would’ve clashed - now that’s a game I’d buy.

[@wojtek1582]

@@realtomic Yes, that would be more interesting, but still hard to pull it off if you are focused on 1500-1000 BC times. Much harder to make it as interesting as Medieval or 1500-1600 Japan. The more so I do not understand why they haven't made yet Total War Pike and Shot. 16th-17th century Europe - so many wars, extremely rich history. Landsknechts, tertios, Dutch reforms, then Swedish reforms, winged hussars from Poland, Tatars, Janissary corps and many many more different units with different tactics.

[@SJ-xb7lg]

@@wojtek1582 wow so complex lmfao

[@White_Sonja]

Funny, every time i tried to play a modern Total war i went back to play Medieval total war 1, i was so happy when i found Crusader Kings.

[@kreut5299]

I only would give a medieval 3 a 5% chance that i would like it. The last new total war i tried was rome 2 and i didn't like it at all. Not because of the bugs, i played it like one year after release, but because of all the changes that have been made. Units could only be moved together with a general? I'm out. Weird building restrictions in settlements? Im out. Units automatically replenish? Im out. Game is barely modable? I dislike. Units also are just a bit to responsive. In medieval 2 you can really mess up if you don't pay attention to your unit when you give them orders, like the cavalry charge will be week or the unit will be too stretched out. Sure the units sometimes were a bit to unresponsive but now they are to responsive for my taste. Also when i watch Warhammer content by legends of total war for example, I just heavely dislike the weird focus on the balance of power and inflicting the army loss. Most of these things are just deal-breaker for me and i highly doubt those would change at all doesn't matter if it is an historical title or not. PS: also not sure how I like those automatic garrisons. Hevely depends how they are implemented

[@Imaf2020]

You get a like just for being an actual fan of (the real historical character) Napoleon. I teach history, and every year my students are shocked at his much bigger than life accomplishments.

[@realtomic]

I appreciate it! And thank you for your dedication in teaching about Napoleon’s achievements and disasters! If you haven’t already, check out Epic History’s video on Napoleon’s entire career, from Toulon to Waterloo - it’s probably the best visual aid to anyone wanting to understand more about his amazing career: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJ6Ug5ugmMl9m80

[@stevebuscemi3622]

I'll take Medieval 2 remastered at this point..

[@sureucan9366]

Game of thrones total war would be the best. Make an end game event that involves white walkers and it's a gritty world with a crazy diplomacy system. They could also use fantasy aspects in the game as well. I imagine a 3 kingdoms diplomacy system in the game that would really compliment the game of thrones world.

[@realtomic]

This would be an amazing game, but the diplomacy would have to be vastly improved to simulate the complexity and the political motives of different kingdoms. So yea, a 3 kingdom style diplomacy, except even better

[@MsSirAndy]

They will sooner do a Medieval 2 remastered than a Medieval 3

[@sureucan9366]

Shogun 2 had gun powder before fall of samurai expansion there bud. You should try playing it

[@bigbake132]

They never made a proper Pike and Shot era game. 30 Years War, English Civil War, etc.

[@DelNiceBeto]

I wouldn't say it's historical vs fantasy but good vs bad mechanics

[@nsawatchlistbait289]

Its History (Tacticality) fans vs Warhammer (Statisticality) fans. GW rots everything it touches

[@zaert21]

(Sorry this went on longer than I planned, but I started thinking about more things as I wrote) Before I commented, I checked how many times Rome 2 had been mentioned (at the time of commenting) it was 11 times - between like 4-5 people? I wanted to avoid repeating a lot of the same stuff - so sorry if I do, but it is a testament to why people like Rome 2. I myself graduated with History poltics at uni but also studied classical civ in for A level (made it into the top 20 papers in the country for Roman Britain despite taking a 20 min nap in the exam as I had been up all night watching the 2016 brexit results lmao - a testament I hope to how much I love classical history as much as early modern/modern stuff). Roman history got me into wider stuff and Rome 1 was actually part of that process. I was doing my A levels by the time of Rome 2. I first played Rome 2 when it still had the stupid mechanic of - you demolish a building but if you don't fill that slot up in like 2 turns, slums appear and effectively punish you. By the time I came back to the game I believe it was when the Second Triumvirate DLC was introduced for free? top tier dlc and setting - instead of having to found a greater Roman republic - you had to fight ai playing the same powerful faction as you across 3 continents (with differences in which auxiliaries, economies and provinces you got + access to Rome, let alone if you played Pompey for the ultimate challenge. They kind of pulled this off again with the Crisis of the Third Century DLC which was risky but well done and very interesting. barbarian invasion/Atilla cover the collapse of the classical era and beginning of the dark ages. But Crisis of the Third Century is severely underrated as a DLC setting. Rome 2 also sort of had its own Shogun lite with the Greek Peloponnesian War which I know some people didn't like but I came to love. Napoleon scale map and game of serious manoeuvres due to the mountains and sea blocking you at times or providing you great opportunities and the dangerous starting positions of the main 2 factions and the other 2 being highly concentrated to defend but hard to expand etc. I have focussed heavily on the DLCs but many of them really are a strength to Rome 2. Something else that comes to mind is that Rome 2 (this is partially true with Atilla and I can't speak for the WH series which I have only lightly played but know has depth) - I Rome 2 believe captures the sheer cultural scale/variety of any historical tw game. You can start in different parts of the map but if you're going for end game large scale empires etc - one of the reasons it's not necessarily as boring to do as say Med 2, empire or Shogun is that variety of factions and all of the unit rosters that come with them. You might have the money to buy some good troops, but you are capped by how many generals/proportionate to scale - which I think is an ok/good mechanic, you actually have to think about where you want a general/new army. If you have vulnerable provinces, for the love of God make sure they have a good enough Garrison you can hold with otherwise risk losing it. Not like med 2 where you just need heavy cav and will win 90% of ridiculous battles. But yeah - because you have that variety, you do have to constantly tailor your armies. An army that might work in Gaul is probably going to die on the steppes. It's harder to run with the same strat the entire game. One could say this was achieved back with Rome 1/Barbarian invasion, but they were limited by the scale and ai of the time. Med 2 unit wise has this with say when the Mongols arrive and force you to adapt. But usually by that point you just beat them in sieges. This game doesn't allow for that. Many settlements don't have walls. Harder to cheese. Anyway, I'm getting on. Fact is people kind of write off Rome 2 because of the poor rushed opening but as others have said, it's actually a developer redemption arc considering how the game is basically kind of perfect now? as opposed to other companies who abandon their projects, or the other shit shows CA has released as you point out.

[@stevenahlberg1542]

We do not need a Lord of the Rings Total War we have Warhammer already

[@obiwayne2247]

Well even if they woud release it now, i woudent trust them to to a good job in it actually, my biggest hope is that some other upcomming company creates kinda a spiritual sucessor to medieval 2.

[@dauntless0711]

If TW wants to focus on characters in a Medieval context, they should do it economically. Armies are expensive and Europe was broke after the Dark Ages, so Feudalism as a system was heavily focused on how well a king could leverage the assets of his nobles. Give characters their own treasury, and let them go bankrupt if managed poorly. Force players to keep them wealthy to recruit the best units. Give them deeds and titles that the player can juggle around to manage loyalty, and let succession civil wars break out when nobles are resentful. That’s how you put focus on the characters while keeping it historical.

[@seanwoodgate5335]

Dude, I tried out Three Kingdoms because it was on gamepass for a bit... AND IT SLAPS HARD. Its an incredibly fun and well-made game that is replayable bexause different factions have their own flairs.

[@realtomic]

It’s incredibly well made I’ll give you that, I’m just not sure how much variety there is in the combat, - and the only way they found to add variety was to add some ahistorical units to give the game more flavor. Campaign diplomacy is second to none though, the most fleshed out system

[@seanwoodgate5335]

@@realtomic Yeah the unit to unit combat doesnt feel quite as clear cut to Rome or Shogun, though there is still the in depth rock paper scissors, its just less noticeable at first because units that looked similar would be different in combat. Like guys with big swords good vs cav, little swords good vs spears haha. Diplomacy though was definitely the best Ive seen, there was actual room for manipulation. Loved the heroes though, fits perfectly with the source material.

[@RocketHarry865]

We really need somebody to replace creative assembly and the total war series able to make the same sort as games as they do but the thing is nobody does.

[@Хармония-ш6ж]

There were many interesting points you've made and like also gave another point of view, to view this whole situation, which I didn't thought about. Especially the one. If CA are capeable to deliver at all. I guess we gonna see it with the Stars Wars Total war (saga ?). Although the very "star wars" itself implies strong impliment of characters (heroes). So, we gonna see OP personalities destroying 2-3 units. But intrestingly enough it makes more sense, since everyone knows the theme, and that Jedi are badass, and you gonna expect them to be, hopefully balanced good.

[@CaptainGrimes1]

I stopped buying after Napoleon, they needed to fix empire and they didn't, there's so much missing from there, the city battles are a joke and besieging the same basic fort again and again is tedious

[@kwagar9810]

I hope it doesn't get release. I don't want them butchering up one of my favorite games.

[@libeloussmith7656]

How about a Renaissance of 1300-1600 Infantry? Actually there are so many good mods out there earlier CA games can be approached like new games.

[@the_roman_emperor_fisheater]

empire 2 would probably be made before medieval 3 and thats probably just due to the advancements since 2009, pretty much ai would be better

[@stefankatsarov5806]

AI has not improved much if at all. The AI in Empire shoud have been better but the management screwed it up. And again better AI is the main talking point about every totall war atit never improves.

[@duxae1617]

I don't want a medieval 3 anyway. I know lots disagree but the era isn't really suited for map painting. Games like Crusader Kings do the era far better. Now, if you were to make Medieval 3, basically make it like Crusader Kings but with warfare mechanics, less focus on blobbing.

[@gabesarti7184]

To be fair, I could watch both historical and fantasy total war, especially in regards to fantasy medival two total war mods.

[@onsholo]

A lot of historical fans like myself love the warhammer mod for medieval 2 and yet we hate the warhammer total war games. The quality and popularity of the Lord of the Rings mod is no reason to be hopeful for a Lord of the Rings total war.

[@realtomic]

This is a fair point I didn’t contemplate, thanks for sharing 👍

[@stefankatsarov5806]

So true.

[@niku4259]

Only thing they need to do is just port medieval 2 in to a 64 bit so that modern hardware can utilize more power for better performance. I have no hopes about medieval 3 being anything close to 2. I hope modders can use the leaked mother code and improve medieval 2 if we won't get anything from CA

[@christopherwebber3804]

To make Medieval Total War 3, all they have to do is use the Shogun 2 engine, fix a few bugs, and improve the graphics a bit - surely not that hard!

[@rodrigomachado5291]

I actively dislike fantasy-history mixes, I think it’s dumb, if there’s any fantasy element I most definitely will not buy it.

[@liama2846]

In fairness to Rome 2, thanks to DEI, it’s now the best there is

[@papadhmitrioy8070]

Thing is. Isnt Lord of the rings warner bros?

[@littlekuribohimposte]

I don't think we'll get Med 3, but a Med 2 remaster like rome,except with problems fixed, would be welcome

[@jacksteele3028]

I just want the American Civil War and the subsequent Indian Wars. If that means an Empire-style "Age of Victoria", then I'm game. I've been playing FotS just trying to emulate the feel.

[@De_Damond]

Medieval 3 might also fail if they do a troy where everything is vibrant and beautiful.... War is dark and gritty GIVE DARK AND GRITTY 😂 I think Attila was the best graphics wise if they wanna get those people aswell

[@pavlomorhun]

Guy, med 2 made non main studio, but studio in Australia, what closed a long time ago. Main CA make empire in that time. It’s not funny watch video about CA and TW from author who mistakes in simple things…

[@shrekdank3473]

Naa we want to see an empire 2

[@realtomic]

Empire 2 would be amazing

[@park1699]

Great video. I personally think that modding is gonna be the salvation for the historical total war. take rome 2 for example the game base is meh but add DEI mod and bam you have a game 10x better. Same with all the insanely good medieval 2 mod or even the attila mod like mk1212 or ancient empire which give 2 completely different timeline to play in and different experience compare to the base game or the other mods. Modders have the passion, vision and dedication that CA lack in historical game and this is what make a big difference. So the best for CA would be to help modders with better support for old and new game. this way CA get their money and we get insane mod that make our experience infinity better while playing. I do think that CA will go fully into fantasy game. the game of throne universe has been popping off a lot in TV series and has gotten a lot of fan. its also medieval in setting so that would make it a viable option with mythical creature and different start date. LOTR is also a big one that could be really intereesting to play with and really go into that fantasy setting while touching more the army combat instead of the op hero like warhammer. In any case we have shown that the community can bleed CA if they throw trash at us and i think they learn their lesson with bad game like pharao

[@XAZTECXWOLFX]

Why the hate on Three kingdoms game shit was a good game had lots of players really liking the game there were big issues but how you compare Troy and pharaoh to Three kingdoms

[@georgimihalkov9678]

Great analysis bro.

[@miroslavantonin9354]

i do agree with u in everything except one thing. Political intrigues are important in Rome 2 !! Maybe if u play very easy,easy and medium than yes you dont have to touch olitices at alll but hard,very hard and legendary it is needed so much ... if u dont have rebelions a civil war all the time and if u dont want that oposition has more political power than you ( whitch effects some chraterisitcs of some charkcerts in your political party) than you HAVE TO touch the politics

[@Pontifexum]

Yes Rome 2's release was abysmal but arguably it has one of the best redemption arcs of any TW game. The fact that they released a free DLC, implemented a family tree after launch, fixed most of the bugs, and even released another DLC in 2018 (a great one too) really shows that when CA isn't lazy and listens to its audience good things happen

[@realtomic]

It does have some amazing dlc, and some of the best campaigns included in that such as Ceaser in Gaul, so yes, fair point

[@Pontifexum]

@@realtomic I really loved your video btw I wasn’t trying to pick a fight or anything 😅 sorry if I came off that way

[@stevenahlberg1542]

Empire 2 plz

[@Munkybhai]

Isn't Pharoah good now?

[@AmersetShane]

Agree its actually better now. But i personally still love medieval 2 more and pharaoh is not even in top 3 for me.

[@gabrielnasc6322]

someone has to do it

[@kgius7434]

Who romanticised the medieval era? Its actually the most demonized era😅

[@hokumdog]

Only Jews demonize it

[@F510C]

Just remaster Medvial 2

Medieval 2 is not perfect. Ask the merchant guild why.

[@Sanvone]

TW probably already peaked with Warhammer - I doubt LoTR will see financial success of the same magnitude not only because setting offers less unit diversity and magic but also because upcoming thin years for huge swats of western world will cut into CA too (which is subsidised by British goverment...). This isn't even mentioning the financial wants of Tolkien estate, that I could observe over years in regards to their business with Games Workshop. Also it was partially self inflicted by community itself during times of Rome2:TW. Many "bugs" were memed into oblivion thus CA scrapped whole concepts of mechanics to replace them with minimal placeholders instead of developing them through troubled birth, which resulted in wasted years of work only to slowly start coming back to the same concepts. I'm talking about siege battles with multiple capture points, that people hated because it cut into their habit to abuse the living crap of map to re-enact their own Thermopylae fantasies. There is also huge and still pilling on technical debt (CA was never great at patching their games), which after recent failures of newest titles as well as whole "Saga" brand doesn't seem likely to be resolved anytime soon. WH was terrible because there is no better future after it - no historical setting compares to having dragons, magic, single entity heroes etc. Both game engine and how they balanced it lead to erosion of tactics importance. Getting back to it will feel like a step back for many players, who get accustomed since time of Shogun 2 to more Arcadey gameplay. I won't even describe CA reputation disasters in last few years that sometimes alienated whole national communities with ban happy CA mods (lastly their restarted their forum meaning over 10 years worth of post went into oblivion). In the last few years even CA content creators Shills backstabbed company once they realised that it was no longer financially viable to support previous CA marketing. Medieval 3 to happen needs either CA being on a brink of bankruptcy and gambling everything on it or them having string of great successes on smaller scale that will lead them to believe themself being able to not repeat Rome2 fiasco. I think the most viable title out of older generation is Shogun 3, as it had quite a limited scope and previous iteration were great successes. Still wouldn't expect it before 2028 the earliest.

[@angleofshadow9818]

Warhammer franchise has millions of fans, yet LoTR franchise has more than 2 billion. We can get direct comparison from older TW games and their mods. LoTR mods are hundreds of times more popular than any Warhammer mod.

[@rock0795]

Agreed

[@crazymembranes]

honestly i think medieval 3 with 3 kingdoms style charecters would be great, have all the medieval kings with mad superpowers, like Fredrick Barbarossa be broken and OP but if you march him over a river he dies, or have charles VI who has a chance of just attacking all your own troops at all times

[@Kachanoid]

please, no

[@NaCk210]

I'm about to say it... I don't care about Medieval 3. And also Troy is a great game, and Pharaoh will be one too once the dynasties update drops. Just because it doesn't sell doesn't mean the games aren't good. They have excellent, and more importantly, COHESIVE and COHERENT design, even better than Warhammer's.

[@Certified_overthinker]

hi thomas :3

[@MarvinGrigsby-rs1jn]

Hi am your biggest fan