History WMG / TotalWarThreeKingdoms

* Ma Teng

* The Sun Jian Trailer shows a map of China including the Korean Peninsula and the island of Taiwan, suggesting they are possible trade partners or playable factions.

*** Chen Shou's ''Records of the Three Kingdoms'' (三国志) is a thing, mind.

[[WMG: The 11 Factions the beginning and warlord are]]



* Lu Bu

* Gongsun Zan

* Ma Teng

[[WMG: Where did people get the idea that Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a historical source?]]
* A lot of the complaints against the game seems to based off of the fact that it is not going to be historically accurate. OK, but why make that assumption? Just because the game is called Total War: Three Kingdoms? The novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms is not a historically source, no one considers it that, but the period was real history. So why jump to the conclusion that the game is based off of the Novel and not the actual period of Chinese history? Why jump to the conclusion that CA is exclusively gonna base their game off of the novel? It is kinda like assuming a total war game called Total War: War of the Roses is automatically based off of Shakespeare's Richard III? Can someone just explain to me, why all these assumptions? Or are people really ignorant enough to think zhuge liang and caocao, and other people are just fake characters invented for the novel as opposed to real people that the novel used?

* Cao Cao
* Liu Bei
* Sun Jian

* Sun Jian

* A lot of the complaints against the game seems to based off of the fact that it is not going to be historically accurate. OK, but why make that assumption? Just because the game is called Total War: Three Kingdoms? The novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms is not a historically source, no one considers it that, but the period was real history. So why jump to the conclusion that the game is based off of the Novel and not the actual period of Chinese history? Why jump to the conclusion that CA is exclusively gonna base their game off of the novel? It is kinda like assuming a total war game called Total War: War of the Roses is automatically based off of Shakespeare's Richard III? Can someone just explain to me, why all these assumptions? Or are people really ignorant enough to think zhuge liang and caocao, and other people are just fake characters invented for the novel as opposed to real people that the novel used?

** Romance of the Three Kingdoms is about as much a history book as the Legends King Arthur is. No one is suppose to take it as a serious account of Chinese history. It would be like taking Richard the third as a historical source. So my question is, why would this be an issue? Either the game is based on the novel like the Dynasty Warriors games and basically just gonna be another Total Warhammer type game, or else it is gonna be based on the real events of the Three Kingdoms period in China, in which case the game would be historically accurate. Just like how no one takes the Dynasty Warriors games as being historically accurate, if they decide to base the game off of the novel, there is no "but we based it off of a historical Chinese source so it must be accurate" because the Chinese themselves don't even consider the novel to be any more than a story. TLDR: Three Kingdoms was a real period in Chinese history, the people in the novel like caocao, guanyu and zhuge liang are real, the novel is not a historical source, but rather just a story. just because they call it Total War Three Kingdoms, that does not mean they are basing it off of the novel and not going to be historically accurate.

** Romance of the Three Kingdoms is about as much a history book as the Legends King Arthur is. No one is suppose to take it as a serious account of Chinese history. It would be like taking Richard the third as a historical source. So my question is, why would this be an issue? Either the game is based on the novel like the Dynasty Warriors games and basically just gonna be another Total Warhammer type game, or else it is gonna be based on the real events of the Three Kingdoms period in China, in which case the game would be historically accurate. Just like how no one takes the Dynasty Warriors games as being historically accurate, if they decide to base the game off of the novel, there is no "but we based it off of a historical Chinese source so it must be accurate" because the Chinese themselves don't even consider the novel to be any more than a story. TLDR: Three Kingdoms was a real period in Chinese history, the people in the novel like caocao, guanyu and zhuge liang are real, just because they call it Total War Three Kingdoms, that does not mean they are basing it off of the novel and not going to be historically accurate.

* Some of the negative criticism towards ''Three Kingdoms'' describes Creative Assembly as making another Total War in an "Asian Fantasy Setting" similar to Warhammer instead of going back to real-life history. This is definitely not helped by the fact that some of the common jokes on the internet like to make fun of China for being infamous for historical inaccuracy and using excessive amounts of fictitious exaggeration and fluff when it comes to their ancient history. Even an early editor said that the novel ''Romance of the Three Kingdoms'' was 70% fact and 30% fiction. So the question here isn't so much "Will it be Historically Accurate?" but "How Historically Accurate will it be?"

* Some of the negative criticism towards ''Three Kingdoms'' describes Creative Assembly as making another Total War in an "Asian Fantasy Setting" similar to Warhammer instead of going back to real-life history. This is definitely not helped by the fact that some of the common jokes on the internet like to make fun of China for being infamous for historical inaccuracy and using excessive amounts of fictitious exaggeration and fluff when it comes to their ancient history. Even an early editor said that the novel ''Romance of the Three Kingdoms'' was 70% fact and 30% fiction. So the question here isn't so much "Will it be Historically Accurate?" but "How Historically accurate will it be?"

* Some of the negative criticism towards ''Three Kingdoms'' describes Creative Assembly as making another Total War in an "Asian Fantasy Setting" similar to Warhammer instead of going back to real-life history. This is definitely not helped by the fact that some of the common jokes on the internet like to make fun of China for being infamous for historical inaccuracy and using excessive amounts of fictitious exaggeration and fluff when it comes to their ancient history. Even an early editor said that the novel ''Romance of the Three Kingdoms'' was 70% fact and 30% fiction.

* The history, The books, and in unannounced dynasty warriors crossover material, using the best of all, comment with.

* Since ''Shogun 2'' had Buddhist Warrior Monks, why shouldn't China have Warrior Monks as well? As usual for a Glass Cannon, they would be units with high melee attack and melee defense but have expensive recruitment and upkeep, be vulnerable to arrows due to lack of armor, and require certain technologies and infrastructure. The Warrior Monks would have various fighting styles that depend on the region that they were recruited from. You could have monks that specialize with long weapons (Spear, Staff), short weapons (Sword, Knife), or even unarmed fighting styles.

* Since ''Shogun 2'' had Buddhist Warrior Monks, why shouldn't China have Warrior Monks as well? As usual for a Glass Cannon, they would be units with high melee attack and melee defense but have expensive recruitment and upkeep and require certain technologies and infrastructure. The Warrior Monks would have various fighting styles that depend on the region that they were recruited from. You could have monks that specialize with long weapons (Spear, Staff), short weapons (sword, knife), or even unarmed fighting styles.
[[WMG: The game will get 3 sources.]

* The history, The books, and in unannounced dynasty warriors crossover material, using the best of all, comment with

[[The game will get 3 sources.]]
,The history, The books, and in unannounced dynasty warriors crossover material, using the best of all, comment with

* Since ''Shogun 2'' had Buddhist Warrior Monks, why shouldn't China have Warrior Monks as well? As usual for a Glass Cannon, they would be units with high melee attack and melee defense but have expensive recruitment and upkeep and require certain technologies and infrastructure. The Warrior Monks would have various fighting styles that depend on the region that they were recruited from. You could have monks that specialize with long weapons (Spear, Staff), short weapons (sword, knife), or even unarmed fighting styles.

* Since ''Shogun 2'' had Buddhist Warrior Monks, why shouldn't China have Warrior Monks as well? As usual for a Glass Cannon, they would be units with high melee attack and melee defense but have expensive recruitment and upkeep and require certain technologies and infrastructure. The Warrior Monks would have various fighting styles that depend on the region that they were recruited from. You could have monks specialize with long weapons (Spear, Staff), short weapons (sword, knife), or even unarmed fighting styles.