Rome: Total Realism, Europa Barbarorum, or Europa Universalis:Rome?

[jewish_i]

I'm planning on starting an epic game beginning in ancient times and continuing into the present. However, I have not chosen which game to play the ancient area with. Which of these three best represents ancient history and has plausible, balanced outcomes? Thanks a bunch! :beam:

P.S.--unit's don't matter to me.

[HunGeneral]

Well I would say:

RTR - FoE (Fate of Empires) is accurate in terms of historcal accuracy, well made and chalanging, even the AI is smarter then ususal thanks to fine balancing - right now it only covers the westenm mediterranian.

EB: also a very well made and historically accurate game - it covers more Area then the original R.TW map.

EU:R - don't know since I haven't played it. I have been playing EUIII: complete (which I find a very great game, althoguh damm hard sometimes), but I don't know how much it is similar to its follower.

On my experience I would suggest EB if you wish a large scale empire or RTR:FoE if youre fine with the area of "just" the western mediterranian.

[A Very Super Market]

If you actually want to try and simulate empire-building without tons of house rules, EU:R should be a better. But it's a totally different engine, and probably ultra-complicated as always. I've also heard a few bad things about it from Paradox fans....

[Jebivjetar]

I played RTR few years ago, but EB made me addicted like no game before. RTR is pretty good, and the only mod of RTW in which Roman legionares can hurt phalanx from the front; it has good balance (reduced killing rate) and it's enjoyable. Anyway EB has "that something" that puts it above RTR, imho.

[Cambyses]

"ancient times to the present" - well, I think that's what the EU franchise offers. EU: Rome -> EUIII -> Victoria -> Hearts of Iron. That's almost as present as you can get. Otherwise the best option is CivIV. The TW alternative line is quite inferior IMO.

However, if you just want to play an excellent game set in the Roman period, and are not bothered about the future - then EB is best.

[Olaf The Great]

Did RTR7 -ever- come out? I haven't cared much since the Turkish invaded, all I know is some Iberia campaign came out.

[Andy1984]

Few people manage to play an EB-campaign to the end. The same goes for EU3. Therefore:
- you should be concerned about difficulty. After playing several hundreds of turns in EB you're likely to be unchallenged as far as Europe and part of Asia is concerned. I guess it will become boring.
- you should ask yourself how you plan on playing the era between the classical period and the earliest starting dates of EU3.
- you should realize the TW-series is - to every extent - incompatible with the paradox-games. There are few to no ways to transfer armies, fighting styles, dynasties or the larger part of your infrastructure from the TW-series to a paradox-game. This will screw up the continuity between these eras when you switch from one game to the next.

[Ludens]

I am afraid we don't allow comparison threads in the EB forum because these generally devolved into bashing of other mods. Since this discussion has been polite so-far, I am going to move it to the mod discussion forum.

[Lysimachos]

Concerning the Paradox Games, you forget Crusader Kings. They cover the timeline quite thoroughly, I think:
EU: Rome + Vae Victis; Crusader Kings + Deus Vult; EU I/II/III + Napoleon's Ambition + In Nomine + Heir to the throne; Victoria + Revolutions; Hearts of Iron I/II + Doomsday + Armageddon/III.
I never played EU: Rome, but as far as I heard it is one of the less well made Paradox games, though.