Furthermore, the areas around Sogdia weren't uninhabited, as there were quite a few Indo-Greek, Iranian-Greek, nomadic, etc groups and kingdoms.
Rome could have been a hoplite-era power, but instead they have it BC where they no longer used hoplites: the more cultures and factions you want in a campaign, the more restricted you are since you need a singular timeframe to fit them all. The best starting point for Han dynasty may not be a good starting point for Koreans and etc. From a game development standpoint it is much more sensible to use the less is more approach; Shogun2 after all was just about Japan for all the faults it brings, and it's a flop then it's far less of one than Empire, which tried to do too many with too little.
The historical details you keep mentioning are frankly a secondary concern, because the primary concern is whether you can fit it all into the game at all. Talk about how Han Dynasty did this and that, if that's not going to even end up in a Total War game, all that talk is pointless. This is why I don't care for posts that are basically ripoffs of wikipedia articles complete with giant maps you can just google- how it can actually translate into a campaign map and how you control characters and armies matter much more.
I don't think the factions were diverse in the latter group of games you mention, there are many reasons why people would consider them better games in comparison to others, despite also being large in scope. The older games were less diverse than the newer ones; IMO the newer ones simply failed to raise the bar in terms of actual gameplay: "distinct" units mean nothing if half of them are just renamed Levy Spearmen. At least in Warhammer, the equivalent of a low-level melee unit is already drastic: Empire Swordsmen are nothing like Dwarf Warriors, who are nothing like Skeletons, who are nothing like Orc Boyz.
If you can design a template roster where Korean Swordsmen are nothing like Han Swordsmen who are nothing like Bactrian Swordsmen, yet they are all functioning as low level sword infantry that not only exist opposing eachother but also in conjunction with unique unit rosters for their own factions, all without being just re-modelled variants of eachother, then that'd be great. I also think that a Warring States period campaign is more suitable to introduce a large scope, rather than the other way around where you start big and then proceed to smaller campaigns.
They are basically doing that with Warhammer. Can you imagine how much less time and quality would be in for a game that had to do three titles' worth of content in the development time of one? That's how you end up with Empire. Many of us still at least want something more diverse than Shogun or Napoleon That isn't very hard. They did that in Rome TW 1. You have more expensive infantry with smaller unit sizes eg.
Hastati vs cheap infantry that has larger unit sizes eg. Both were perfectly functional as low level infantry. You had cheap expendable iberian infantry that have javelins, and more expensive basic hoplite infantry that could actually hold the line for a while. My main problem with Warring States is it leaves out the potential for more factional and unit diversity, and folks love diversity. The Southern Kingdoms of the Warring States did extend south past the Yangtze River very far, which is around the center of China today.
A map like that won't have deserts, steppe tundras, snowy mountains, subtropical jungles, rolling mountains, etc of the other regions of China. They just have to avoid making the same mistakes of Rome2.
Even if your assertion is true, one should at least try to match Warhammer's diversity, not give up and settle for RTW's near-fantasy rosters. RTW's unit roster design is as accurate as Rome2's, and at least for the former, this was limited to models more than budget.
RTW's by comparison is like a straight-faced admission of lack of diversity. I think wer ought to grow to of that. Mechanics of unit design ought to develop as well, otherwise we literally see the same cycle of lack of unit variety. They even tried this with the unit upgrade mechanic in Rome2, but was half-baked, half-implemented, and ditched in later titles.
Even the Auxilia mechanic, of which only Rome benefited, was a dead-end. Your idea of what is basically Rome2 is honestly not so much reinventing the wheel, but taking same wheel and calling it new. I'm what you'd call a super conservative but even I can see ways for the concept to innovate and improve itself.
Mostly China sure, but that's hardly a flaw given your reference and reverence to RTW. I'm envisioning a sandbox blank slate sort of strategy game where playing as any faction your interaction with other cultures can influence the sort of army you can have, and beyond merely recruiting mercenaries as well. In this scenario, a Chinese faction that adopts nomadic or tribal culture from north and south can find its army having diversified qualities like greater cavalry focus, etc.
Diversity ought not to be locked behind what units you can play with as a faction, but instead you break these barriers and have certain factions able to hybridize.
You actually don't need a large or diverse unit roster from that point on. Warhammer's diversity comes from fantasy roosters and having completely non-human units with non-human characteristics. In terms of historical TW, more diversity comes from expanding the geographic area to include more factions, more unique fighting styles, and more diverse people. We don't need hundreds of factions with half of them having the same units like in RTW2.
Nor do we need all factions having the same units like in Shogun 2. Shogun 2 was a great game, but the clone units for every faction was a large drawback. We're better off fewer factions than Rome 2, but still with enough diverse factions to provide a different gameplay experience. My issue is not with implementing new features, but with the geography and historical limitations itself.
Chinese traditional drama originating in the Song dynasty had been banned by the Mongols but survived underground in the South, and in the Ming era it was restored. Geographers and Their Space 2. Highways were also built. And like the Han before them, the Tang dynasty had their own powerful leader, Emperor Tai-tsung. However, during the late Tang period the economy was suffering.
What you're saying about new concepts would be great. But the best case scenario is if they combine these new concepts with an expansive map. The Chou dynasty is classified into two periods i. It is so divided because the capital cities in the Western Chou of Fengyi and Haojing lie to the west of the Eastern Chou's capital of Luoyi. Each of these periods saw stormy wars. This led to the rise of new dynasty called the Qin dynasty. The dynasty ruled over China only for 15 years but in spite of such a short duration, it played an important role in Chinese history.
Emperor Qin in order to strengthen the unity of the nation and to maintain the Qin Dynasty he carried out many reforms in politics, economy, military affairs, and culture. It was he who he standardized weights and measures and he insisted that the round coin with square hole Ban Liang Coin should be the coin used in the country.
Editorial Reviews. About the Author. Terry Collins always knew he wanted to be a writer when Ancient China (You Choose: Historical Eras) by [Collins, Terry]. Ancient China: An Interactive History Adventure (You Choose: Historical Eras) [ Terry Lee Collins, Hanchao Lu PhD] on commlithylchoa.tk *FREE* shipping on.
Emperor Shi Huangdi-Qin dynasty. Only two emperors after Shi Huangdi came to power, after which the Han dynasty took over. Emperor Yingzheng was the successor to the throne after Shi Huangdi. He was succeeded by Hu Hai. It was due to his negligence that a revolt took place between Chen Sheng and Wu Guang. Later the revolt was led by Xiang Yu and Liu Bang. It was known as the Chu-Han war, and it lasted for four years.
During the period there were 24 emperors on the throne. Many were excellent contributing to the prosperity of the country with Emperors Gaozu, Wen, Jing and Wu among them.
The Han Dynasty was a period of peace and prosperity as many effective measures were taken by the emperors during their rule. Six dynasties have got its name for the six successive dynasties that appeared in Southern China during the period. This period immediately followed the fall of the Han Dynasty in AD, and was a period of time where China was not united under a single leader.
The 6 dynasties that held power during the three and a half centuries were:. The Sui Dynasty lasted for only 38 years and had only three emperors during its tenure. Sui united China again under one rule. They also expanded the Great Wall and built the Grand Canal. The decline of the Sui Dynasty started from the second monarch, Emperor Yang, who was a tyrant. But I had to overcome that.