The Saga title - Troy was released on the 13th of August, as such the amount of information about it on the wiki is scarce.

Editors are needed to document all the new things added in Troy. Anyone with interests in the Total War series, the bronze age and the Iliad or simply cataloguing information to contribute to the wiki is greatly appreciated.

UPDATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am very happy with the influx of excellent editors we have been seeing lately thanks to the release of Total War: Three Kingdoms. How do we capitalize on this? Where can we find more people who have a passion for Total War and editing?

What can the staff do to improve your editing experience? Please list your opinions below.

How do  I can't load the Battle of Ligny as it comes up locked but I have Tiotal War Napoleon Definiotive Edition ?

Anyone help me ?

Derren_nesbitt@hotmail.com

Thanks

Some of the frustrations from Shogun 2 are present in FotS, namely that allies have an extremely high chance of betraying you, even if they're vassals you liberate from factions that they hate. It's much more rabid in FotS than Shogun 2 though, for a couple of reasons.

The first is that realm divide happens much earlier in FotS than TWS2. In TWS2 you could capture roughly 20-23 provinces before triggering realm divide, which is roughly a third of the map. If you allied with someone beforehand and keep them happy, you can effectively conquer half the map with little difficulty. In FotS, you're looking at more like a fifth of the map being on your side before realm divide. All factions with the same allegiance as you become permanently locked as allies, while all others become permanent enemies. The problem is that, on Legendary, practically all factions quickly convert to the allegiance that's not yours.

The easy way to fix this is to just flip allegiances and then promptly attack your former allies...but this just feels really lame and easy, not to mention ahistorical. The alternative is to then slog through 4/5ths of a game map filled with enemy armies (which is fine) and fleets bombarding every province and port you have nonstop (which SUCKS). Forums recommend either blockading and bombarding every enemy port constantly, which sounds like an excruciatingly long and painful process, or to build a chain of fleets blocking enemies access, which is insanely expensive, particularly when you only have a fifth of the provinces.

So one way to counteract this I've tried to do is recruit a whole bunch of ishin shishi agents and just inciting revolts everywhere. This method in TWS2 was so OP that you could effectively turn the entire map into rebel provinces before RD. The problem is that where you can easily make 50k a turn pre-RD in TWS2 and have missionaries that have a 70+% of inciting rebellions and usually costing about 800 per try, in FotS you're making more like 9000-15000 per turn pre-RD and agents have a ~50% chance of success even if speced specifically to incite revolts, and cost 1000 koku per incite attempt. This means that you are blowing through some 30-60% of your income just to incite revolts, half of which won't work per turn. Rebellions are also weaker, usually just featuring a bunch of levy infantry, while enemy armies are just everywhere with a bunch of uber units ready to wipe them out.

The last method I can think of is to expand extremely--slowly--being very careful to not discover any new clans until everything is heavily upgraded. If they haven't discovered you, they can't declare war on you, so that's something...the extremely guarded approach also means that by the time you moved out you would have a bunch of techs researched. The big problem is that this doesn't stop the problem of basically every clan converting to an enemy allegiance, plus the concern of the campaign running out of time before you can complete your objectives.

FotS is so frustrating partially because I think the actual combat is pretty good. If only they made it so that all the clans are bizarre backstabbers who do anything to kill you it'd be a great game. In my Satsuma campaign I allied with the clan owning Tsukushi. Then Tanegashima, my vassal, declares war on me. A turn later, my ally declares war on me. The following turn the Obama and Jozai, clans that are on the opposite side of the map and had only met me two turns ago, landed doom stacks in Bungo and started shelling my provinces. Is this supposed to be fun??

I get that CA was probably trying to make the late game of their total war games more exciting. Previous games' late-game turn into snoozefests as your invincible armies just overrun everything. But surely there's a balance that can be struck here.

This seems odd (and irritating), but there does not seem to be a database for turns needed to construct buildings in TWS2, ROTS, or FOTS. I'll try to find them but in the mean time, if you find the building times of literally any building, please post them here. Thanks.

It's the first time I'm playing a Total War game, and I saw that you should be able to build siege equipment during the siege but I don't find more information. When I'm playing I don't have this option so I guessed it was because I needed special buildings but I can't find which ones. I found the mangonels, but it looks like they are built like any other units. Is siege equipment completely absent in Shogun 2?

In ETW and NTW, I classified mounted infantry as both cavalry and infantry (see Light Dragoons (Napoleon: Total War) as an example). I did this because they could dismount and fight as infantry, which most cavalry could not do. In the Japan-themed total war games, however, all cavalry can dismount. So should they be categorized as infantry?

Pros:

• It would be consistent in terms of formatting across other Total War pages.

Cons:

• For the purposes of clarification to the reader, it'd be less cluttering to categorize infantry as only those which cannot be cavalry and vice versa; it'd be a clean separation.

What do you guys think? 

I have been creating Shogun 2 pages (to the best of my ability, considering how I've never played the games) and it's become clear that ship mechanics are significantly different compared to NTW and ETW. 

For one thing, ship crews are separated into categories of marines, seamen, and gunners. Some ships have cannons, but most don't. The ones that DON'T have cannons don't have their ranges (bows, firebombs, etc.) listed. So if I ever get around to playing S2TW this will be a thing I'll need to do some research on. 

The last thing to keep in mind is that the ship stats presented on Honga and other sites for ETW and NTW were consistently wrong; I'm willing to bet that they're wrong again for S2TW ships, so I (or another wikia contributor) will need to do some manual testing. 

I have recently begun to document all the historical grievances/friendships factions feel for each other. This will be a pretty exhaustive effort, and probably take a few more days at fastest. Below is a checklist of things to do as well as unanswered questions.

1. Start Italy Campaign. Document all historical friendships/grievances. DONE.

2. Start Europe Campaign. Document all initial historical friendships/grievances. DONE.

3. Play through Europe Campaign, destroying every faction except ones that can't emerge (Batavian Republic, Kingdom of Italy, Kingdom of Naples, Kingdom of Sardinia, Kingdom of Sicily, Papal States), let all other regions rebel. Document all historical friendships/grievances. DONE.

4. Play through Peninsular Campaign. Should be easy, considering how there's 4 factions.

4. Play through Multiplayer Italy Campaign etc.. There are additional factions in the MP campaign. 

5. Play through Multiplayer Egypt Campaign etc. This is necessary as the default singleplayer Egypt campaign does not have diplomacy available.

6. Play through Multiplayer Europe Campaign. This might just overlap with the standard, singleplayer campaign.

7. Play through Multiplayer Peninsular Campaign.

Questions:

Are the grievances generated random, semi-random, or fixed? I can only document things that are fixed, of course. The only way to test this, and I groan just thinking about it, is running the tests through multiple times.

Some of the grievances found make sense. Ireland and GB hate each other, for example. Most factions dislike France due to Napoleon's high-handed ambitions. But some don't make sense. How come Catalonia doesn't hate Spain? Catalonians have wanted independence from Spain for hundreds of years (and many still do). Why do people have historical friendships/grievances with Brittany, a country which hasn't existed for well over a hundred years by the time of NTW? These latter quirks makes me feel like some of the values generated may be random. 

While I was researching for the latest issue of Regimental Stories I wanted to see the Islamic Swordsmen in action in game. The thing is they are not available in custom battles, so I started campaign with Ottomans and invaded Persia in hopes of encountering the unit. I was surprised to see that Persia had Fellahin even though Honga claims that they should not have them. But Honga is wrong once again.

The thing was puzzling me so I started new campaign as Maratha and gifted some regions to Persia, the result was that they recruited Hindu Musketeers and were able to recruit Islamic Swordsmen in another province, All of this means that Persia has a loooot of melee units, Zamindari Pikemen, Dervishes, Fellahin, Islamic Swordsmen and Hindu Musketeers (though it seems like they cannot recruit the melee variant).

Another constatation is the fact that in ETW you can see what units are recruitable by a faction when you right click on their recruitment building, that makes this kind of research a whole lot easier. And as final note, as I mentioned, Honga is wrong again... it looks like Honga is reliable for recent TW games as they update their databases regularly, however their older TW games data is not up to date. The ETW Honga section is 1.3 version based while the final ETW version is 1.5.

Another sources like twcenter wiki are also wrong in their claim that Hindu Warriors are available to Persia and Mysore while according to my test that's not the case, these factions have access only to Hindu Musketeers, it looks like they just copy-pasted the Musketeers info into the Warriors page. Now the biggest mistery remains whether factions like Afghanistan have access to Hindu units and/or Fellahin.

UPDATE: Turns out actually I was wrong, for some unknown reason Persia is given few Fellahin units at the start of the campaign but they cannot actually recruit the unit since their unit roster is Indian-based with Zamindari Pikemen and Dervishes, it seems that's also the case for Afghanistan. The only nations able to recruit Fellahin are Morocco and Barbary States and even the Mamelukes don't have access to Fellahin (which is odd since Fellahin are from Egypt in reality) since they have the Ottoman style roster.

As I was writing trivia sections for the ETW unique buildings it occured to me that we could also add the best descriptive real life image of the particular buildings. Any thoughts for or against real life images on the wiki?

This is just so we can all make clear what pictures we prefer to be in the infoboxes for Rome 2 units; screenshots or unit cards. This is mainly so the admins don't have to jump back on forth to each other's message boards, but if any other community members happen to stumble onto this, feel free to give your opinion as well; this is a community site after all.

Now, from what I gather from you guys (Brainwasher5 and Nanomat,)we're pretty much in agreement that we'll use unit cards for the infoboxes (as lackluster as they are) and put screenshots in the galleries. Is that correct? (Again, this is pretty much so we can all confirm it in one place)

Flameroran77 (talk) 20:42, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

Just for fun, I've been changing the pictures and titles of wiki achievements to those of achievements you can get while playing Total War games. I'm proud of a few of them: for example, I changed the "Caffeinated!" achievement (editing 100 articles within an hour of their creation) to "The Golden Lightning" (capture an enemy player's capital within 20 turns), and I hope they can add a more unique flavor to this wiki.

If you can think of any good achievements from any total war game that fits particularly well, please tell me what they are here. 

I have begun work on NTW pages (finally), and I have a bit of a problem.

Most units in ETW have near identical artwork over each faction, with only palette swaps. I was more comfortable then just using one faction's unit art and calling it a day. In Napoleon: Total War however, not only are their uniform colors different, but so are their helmets and other aesthetic things. For 6-lber artillery alone I'm seeing significant differences among Austrian, French, Prussian, British, Oldenburgian, and Bavarian units.

So for Cuirassiers (Napoleon: Total War), I have created tabs showing the differences among the major factions. For cuirassiers, at least, I felt that it was a good idea to do so: Prussian cuirassiers don't even have cuirasses, and it actually has an impact on gameplay (their defense is significantly lower). 

But what should we do for the remaining unit pages? Do we make tabs for each page where the unit's not unique to their faction? 

The problem with this is that there are a couple dozen factions (including minor and emergent factions). Twenty tabs sounds messy.

Maybe just have tabs for the five major factions?

On ETW wiki I created pages for Line Infantry, Grenadiers, lance cavalry and so on as unit types. I'm thinking about making them here--how do you feel that I should go about implementing them? Is anyone opposed to my idea, and for what reasons?

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but from what I recall in conversations with Yuri a long time ago, he/she made a unit infobox that would be applicable for units across games. Somewhere along the line, someone created artillery and navy infoboxes to fit their respective unique needs. This system of course works fine and dandy for Empire: Total War; ETW unit infoboxes are named Infobox/Units/ETW. 

Now that I am working on Napoleon: Total War pages, we are still using ETW infoboxes for those pages. Are Napoleon: Total War units substantially different in terms of what stats they have from ETW units? Should we create a separate infobox for them (even for aesthetic reasons, such as a different color scheme)? I'm rather for this as it would more neatly separate pages by games. 

Fully one third or more of this wiki's pages are those I or others have imported from ETW wiki. Aside from the Buildings pages, I consider Empire: Total War information on this wiki to be largely complete; maybe just a couple more hundred edits (which I will do myself if no one helps me) should do the trick. Unhappily, we've only begun scratching the surface of what needs to be done here for this wiki to be taken seriously by audiences. Here are my thoughts for how we should proceed.

We will need to bring every game's information's standard up to speed to what we have for our ETW pages at least. The most orderly way to do this is to start with Shogun 1 and chronologically work our way up from there. At the same time, unless the rest of you all suddenly have a lot more free time, there's simply no way we'll have the information ready for when Total War: Arena and Warhammer come out. What's left of our readerbase is much more likely to be interested in these games than Shogun, and so in the short term we definitely need to focus on them more. As Total War: Arena is coming out first (and appears to be a much smaller game than Total War: Warhammer), I vote that we prioritize this topic above all else in the short term. Nanomat and RoboYote, thank you so much for being proactive here; I will hopefully soon join you.

After we hopefully speedily finish Total War: Arena information, I'd like us to focus on Warhmmer for as much as one can without actually having played the game--and then we should decide whether to work backwards from Rome 2 all the way to Shogun 1, or the same thing in reverse--unless someone here has better suggestions.

In step with updating this wiki...

A couple of things to consider: what do you all think of unlocking achievements? I personally think it's a harmless addition that encourages people to edit, although it's also somewhat unprofessional (then again, we're not getting paid to edit here).

I am a big fan of using the "new" message system because it a) doesn't leave a giant wall of text on talk pages and b) I am automatically notified on my notifications tab whenever someone responds to me. However, I know that YuriKaslov likes the old version better and, on Empire: Total War wiki at least, was not able to receive new notifications that someone was messaging him/her.