The various fan forums are a abuzz with the official announcement for the next Total War game.

It has been confirmed to be Total War Rome II.

Here is a link to a preview with some still shots:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/07/02/total-war-rome-2-preview/


On a personal note:

This may sound like heresy,and although I am a great fan of the series in general, I am a bit disappointed that they are going back to this period in history since it is my least favorite. Being a fan, I of course bought the first Rome TW, but maybe only played through two campaigns. I also have both of the expansions and have never ever played them at all.

I was really hoping for a grand 19th century game battling world wide with all the emerging technology. At 67 this year, I hope I
will still be gaming when they get back to either Med 3 or Empire 2 or whatever they are going to call it.

Cheers

I was actually hoping for an Ancient Greece: Total War, but Rome will do

I hope that they will continue in the direction of the last few games, i.e. smaller but more detailed. A campaign spanning 300+ years (as in the original RTW) may look nice on paper, but it was simply too long, and it didn't allow much depth. I would much prefer it if they focused on, say, only 1st century BC, and expand to other eras through DLC campaigns.

Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur. (...) Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae (...)

One of the developers commented that this period was by far the most requested so that explains why they went back. As for; "more detailed/smaller scale", the devs seem to be saying; "more detailed/larger scale!". How they pull that off remains to be seen.

More detail is always good As to more scale... we'll see.
I liked how in NTW and Shogun they divided the campaigns to focus on a particular conflict. My main gripe with RTW was how a handful of factions would conquer the entire map before the game was halfway through, usually wiping out factions like Gaul and Persia along the way, which left me without a chance to fight my historical enemies. Also the large timespan and the large number of generals made the political "control the senate" game feel rather meaningless.

That is why I felt a limited "1st century BC" campaign would be better. You'd get Marius vs Sulla, Pompei vs Caesar and Anthony vs Augustus, so together with all the foreign wars there would still be plenty of action. Hannibal at the Gates would make a fine DLC then

I like that approach.

after napoleon wars i was hoping for an WW1 release..

Awesome. Rome was one of my favorites. I will be picking this up.

AWESOME!!!!!!!!

Developer interviews: http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/07/02/total-...-campaign-game/

Things that sound promising:
- provinces will consist of several regions
- armies may gain traits
- ability to give orders from the tactical overview map
- "dilemma's", a series of choices the player must make, resulting in different paths

The "personal aspect" was mentioned a few times, so this could bring the depth that I was hoping for.

Expected release is Christmas 2013, so there is still time to re-read the Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCullough

Really hoping for an Empire Total War II (since, despite being so poorly done, it is still my all time favorite).

But this is a good second choice!