World Conquest or No ?

[Lord Romulous]

Just thought id ask how people prefer to play the game.
do you aim for all out conquest or do u prefer to play most of the game as a middle power ?

Myself i prefer to be slightly behind the leading nations.
it is more exciting to know that i can be destroyed if two or more factions decide to declare war on me. makes for careful diplomacy, postion of trade routes etc

[Coldstream]

I'm a middle power. I don't get my kicks from conquering the planet.

[Gaius Julius]

I like being the biggest kid on the block. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[rasoforos]

most of the times i try not to go for total domination , the 60% would be enough. however the temptation is too big so i always end up going for total domination.

[Lord Romulous]

hopefully this poll will be helpful to the devlopers so that they understand that not everyone wants to conquer the world and adding elements to the game that reward the player who prefers to play as one empire among many would be benefical.

new goals aside from conquest could be most developed culture - instead of raising armies you fund artisans, architects and poets. you bring your culture to other nations, though trade etc. soon even though you dont own the world, the majority of the world sees your culture as superior and models their empire on yours. kind of like how the world saw the greek civilisation.

perhaps instead of building armies and conquering you prefer to invest in technology and soon become the leading supplier of armour and weapons in the world. more powerful factions you give you great sums of money to use your stronger but lighter armour etc.

[deejayvee]

I tend to be like rasoforos, except that it's the AI that makes me do it. Every game I decide that this one will be a peaceful one, build up heaps, lots of trade, etc. Then the Italians (usually) attack me and I'm at war with at least 1 AI faction for the rest of the game. They won't accept cease-fires, they waste their troops on my spears and if I don't invade them, those bloody Almohads probably will.

[solypsist]

I always play GA games, but because the way things are set up, I also always end up winning through total domination. The reason is that when I pull ahead (good empire management) the AI gangs up on me and I inevitably have to wipe them out to keep my own peace.

[Fate Amenable to Change]

Interesting - my current (second game of MTW) is GA Byz.
Trying to setup to produce large trade income, but several times found that all my careful marriages, alliances, diplomancy, etc wasted when damn Italians sink one of my ships (thus declaring war) then every other power in Europe deserts me Can't reverse this until I eventually get them to agree to a ceasefire.
So now find myself fighting much more than I would like, but to take revenge I go and assassinate every damn Italian Bishop and emissary I can find, esp the ones in my land

[Psyco]

I just try and kill as much as possible
i dont do stupid attacks just for a few kills but i love nothing more then slaughtering thousands like sheep

[Lord Romulous]

interesting that there is no small fry among us. I guess the Danish patrons of the board are still sleeping http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif (timezones)

[LRossaLordJimi]

Many time i like to not destroy my enemies,because even few years they come back with terrific and strong army http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif
My generals conquer the nation leaving if possible one or two prevences,easy to control http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/idea.gif
Ave

[Brutal DLX]

Well, in Total domination mode, I aim for just that...Total domination.
In GA, I prefer to be a middle power, if you are the strongest you might end up having to fight annoying border skirmishes all the time, but if you are smaller, you can still ally with some factions and be in relative peace.

As someone here gave the example of Byzantine GA campaign, I played one too, and I have to say it was the easiest and laziest of all my campaigns. I inevitably warred with the Turkish and Egyptians, humbled them and then just sat there collecting money and building up my provinces, occasionally having to repel some crusades to the Holy Lands...

[Basileus]

At the start i went for total domination not any more, just getting bigger teching up and having fun..

[Efrem Da King]

I like middle or at least one small fry verse giant war.

[Alrowan]

i like to be big, but big has problems, like defence, income and borders

[NagatsukaShumi]

"Wipe them out, all of them" I love that line, I employ it in MTW, I prefer been a scurge of God than a saintly King.

[kataphraktoi]

As a Byzantine Player I set my own GA goals up that go hand in hand with the AI's own GA's.
Goals such as:
Re-establish the Roman Empire
Re-conquer Justinian's Empire
Reclaim the borders of the old Eastern Roman Empire

after achieving that I settle down marry and pop kids out and train them in the arts of war, but that doesn't mean I am pacified. Instead of worrying about my own backyard when i go campaigning I raid and pillage my neighbours in an annual show of strength, annual meaning every year

I just sit back smoke some gold florins and wait for the armies to knock on my doorstep. fun fun fun

[Bob the Insane]

Leading Power....

What is the point of dominating European trade and politics if there is no one else left to appreciate it???

[Akka]

I like to have a lively Europe, and several neighbors. I just find depressive the end-game, where nearly all factions have disappeared.
Too few people left, it's like the end of a party when most people went back home.

Also, I share the problem that most of players seem to have : I would LIKE, from time to time, to be able to be at peace and to have LASTING alliance, but the "all vs player" (especially if he's leading) and the overly agressive AI makes it about impossible.

Sad :-/

[Lord of the Isles]

I like to turtle ... but my baby just loves to dance .. Oops, start again. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

After some practise games I moved up to Hard then Expert and noticed a trend with most factions. I'd turtle, trying to build up my treasury so that by around the start of the High period I'd be set for conquest. Even though playing GA I usually end up giving up when I get 2/3rds of the provinces for the "limited victory", since at that point the GA win is usually assured. I would set up my trade Empire but on the way I'd take advantage of excommunicated factions, rebel provinces that were tempting targets and provinces I took in short wars when the AI attacked me. I found that it didn't take long before I'd grown so much that I triggered the AI-thinks-you-are-too-big flag and I'd be attacked by lots of factions at once. That caused trade to suffer and pretty soon I'd be struggling for money.

So I changed my strategy to refuse to take more than a few provinces that were big trade earners (e.g. Sweden when playing as England) in the first 100 or so years of an Early campaign. That keeps me small, the AI doesn't gang up on me and with few wars to fight my treasury regularly gets to 250,000 florins or more by the start of the High period, as well as my provinces being fully teched up for the High units (even Master Spearmaker, Master Bowyer for +1 valour units).

Do other Turtles find themselves doing the same? In other words, do others find it true that:

Sitting Pretty equals More In The Kitty? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Trouble is, of course, that this becomes monotonous after a while. Next campaign, I'm going to try some hardcore restrictions on trade, or perhaps try the Polish again, since they are truly the toughest faction to play IMHO.

[Monk]

i enjoy being one of the badest if not the best. holding my own in the world powers is enough for me. somtimes i take a few provinces then go totaly defensive, other times i go for total control (and i usually end up stretched so thin, that theres no way i can grasp victory) or i ally with the strongest and do away with the little guys. either way i play i end up being one of the strongest http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[PanthaPower]

World Conquest http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[HopAlongBunny]

I usually play GA. My attempts at laying low are always thwarted when the AI decides I must die. Normally in the process of eliminating one enemy I get more, as each is defeated the AI seems to get "impetuous" and just attack, w/o regard to any real chance of success. Normally, I get sick of it at 60% domination.

I have had one or two games go to the end...a lil disappointing because most late game GA's seem to either never work, or work one game and not the next

[Cooperman]

Every game I try and play for Glorious Achievements and am determined not to conquer the world but the computer keeps attacking me all game and somehow I always end up conquering the map without ever intending to http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[el_slapper]

Or sometimes the reason is different. In my last GA game, I had the danes, sticked to strict conquest rules(only rebs, without port, with trade resources). So, In 1230, I only has Scandinavia, Prussland(sp?), Livonia, Finland, Ireland & Castille(a poor choice, as main GA for spanish) & fleet no further than Costa Verde. French & english had switched sides(English in France, French in England), cool.

But, at this time, I sent several bishops to scan the map. Ultimate horror. Despite the arrival of the horde, Egypt own more than 1/2 of the map & are advancing merciless. Only the horde seems to be able to stop them - for a while. So I had to weaken them to help my numerous allies. And I destroyed ther Western Army in Morocco(8stars generals are cool), but, to kill the remnants I had to push up to Tunisia, Algeria, Sahara(modded to be playable) & Grenada. Now they suffered a civil war, and are down to a normal power. But I fear I'm now too powerful, wich is what I wished to avoid.....

[Husar]

I most often try to cnquer the world, but I do that different depending on my faction.
As a "European" Nation(England, Germany,...) I always take a lot of rebelling provinces and grow up slowly, but I couldn´t play the turks without expanding very fast in the beginning of the game, because if you don´t wipe out the Egyptians and the Byzantines, they will overrun you after some time.

[Mori Gabriel Syme]

I used to play Total Domination, but it always ended up with me having to fight on all fronts. I'm playing my first Glorious Achievements campaign & having a lot more fun. So my vote is Leading Power.

& I love the idea of funding artisans & so forth. It could add to the influence you have if your court is one of the most cultured.

[Leet Eriksson]

just for laughs i chose the small fry(the only vote) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[The Marcher Lord]

I voted for Leading Power. I usually try to play as a moderate power with lots of diplomacy and trade rather than outright conquest. Trouble is that rival factions get greedy and try to cherry pick my wealthier provinces, this just makes me mad and I turn into a tyrannical despot bathing in the blood of my closest neighbours - so much for peace and good will to all folks http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Pretz]

World Conquest, but on the condition that the map is of only one country - such as Shogun's Japan or VI's British Isles, I don't like the idea of being able to conquer the world with a few conventional armies.

[Vlad The Impaler]

i voted for leading power; i like to be the referee http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
in my actual game i play with the french early.i am at 1280
and all factions are alive , noone is extincted thanks to me;
i own France , Cyprus , Sardinia , Crete , Tripoli ,Antiochia, jerusalem , Portugal ,Leon , Sweden , Norway and Switerland;from this positions i can stop anyone to get big.for example egyptians and byzantines already extinct the turks so i attacked both.i march one army to Egypt and i destroy some facilities and another army to Constantinopole and i destroy also some facilities; not all but enough to makin them weaker. now the turks fights them with some succes; now i got to slow down the hungarians wich i suspected they want to destroy the byzantines so i want to send an army in hungary.
i have only 2 allies : The Golden Horde and The Papacy;
i refuse any other alliance or marriage proposal ; i have the best fleet and only egyptians put me some problem; now i intend to grab some german provinces.i have great commerce and the english are weak; Ireland & Scotland are danes but i intend to conquer them for having their troops; everybody is quaite and noone try to attack me;)

[ToranagaSama]

In MTW, "Most Powerful...."; In STW, well...ahhh...is Shogun isn't it Conquer All is simpler to do, but not necessary.

I've never tried GA, but an IMPROVED GA would be VERY welcome.

[Jampe]

Quote[/b] (Lord Romulous @ Jan. 28 2003,23:21)]perhaps instead of building armies and conquering you prefer to invest in technology and soon become the leading supplier of armour and weapons in the world. more powerful factions you give you great sums of money to use your stronger but lighter armour etc.

Ermm...you did notice the title of the game when you bought it didn't you? Medieval *Total War*???? Not Medieval Total Civ? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[Mihai Viteazu]

I voted for world conquest, because this seems the only way to have peace As the Italians, I started to build a trade empire. After some time, the Germans and Hungarians attacked me at once, the Poles soon after. I had to destroy them because they didn't accept any ceasefire and I have been excomunicated several times in the process. As I destroyed one faction, another attacked me so I had to deal with Sicilians, Byzantines and the Pope. I ended up with a huge empire of 30 provinces in the center o the map. Only the Hungarians, which reemerged and attacked me again trouble my peace now. I'm anxious to see what will bring the future: peace or war? All my neighbours are fighting one another, so I guess no one has any interest in attacking me, but you never know Anyway, I like being big and strong, because it's easier to deal with attackers. When you are small, the conquest of a province by an ennemy and the distruction of it's facilities is a big loss.

[Lord Romulous]

Quote[/b] ]Ermm...you did notice the title of the game when you bought it didn't you? Medieval *Total War*???? Not Medieval Total Civ?

True but did you also notice the results of the poll which indicates that only 24 percent of all respondants favoured the world conquest approach. I think most people enjoy the capability to take over the world but as the poll indicates after the first campaign it is rarly fufilling to keep on aiming for world conquest. there needs to be different aspects to the game in order to hold interest. Something i beleive CA are aware of but need to do more to achieve.

I belevie the majority of MTW gamers would welcome a more involved and complex civilisation aspect to the game as long as the fighting aspects (battle map, units etc etc) were not sacrificed and also expanded upon.

The only thing i do NOT want to have included is a system where you have to send little wood choppers and stone miners out to gather resources i hate those rts type games.

[Longshanks]

I like playing GA and being the top power. I usually don't want an Empire, just conquest of the necessary territories to win. I usually end up with a little bit of an Empire though, because of other nations attacking me.

In my current game I'm playing as England, and I mostly just took rebel provinces. Wales, Scotland, Norway and Ireland were absorbed into my nation. I also launched succesful Crusades against Tripoli and Palestine.(France successfully took Antioch and Edessa, right after a failed Spanish attempt)

After that I made peace w/the Egyptians, having completed my Crusading goals. I found that peace was hard to maintain though, since every 6 or 7 years the Egyptians would break the peace(sometimes alliance ) and throw a Jihad my way. So I hammered them. They also threw a jihad at the French, who also got the better of the Egyptians. Now the Egyptians are left with one province, and France and England control most of the Middle East.(Byzantines control Asia Minor)

I tried to keep the peace w/France too, but they decided to attack my shipping. So I was forced to take Antioch and Brittany(Brittany was goal anyway, luckily enough) from them, after which I established peace once again.

Its difficult to not become an Empire.

[LordKhaine]

In Shogun I prefered to wipe out everyone...

In MTW however... I like to make myself a fairly respectable empire and defend it. I like to be the biggest power... but not by much. The game is no fun unless theres a few other large powers that could gang up on you. I never get 50% of the map cos by then all the fun parts have gone.. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ICantSpellDawg]

i cant wait till i can play as the irish, then europe will run red with the blood of my enemies... or at least england/scandanavia - ive seen the map

[Old Bald Guy]

Ok, so I guess I'm a Civ player. I wish I could just develop my country, trade peacefully, and go to war only as a last resort, except for the Crusades and other historical events.

This is almost a perfect game. So very close. It has almost everything I could want in a game--war, diplomacy, trade, but being peaceful just gets boring and you end up going to war against the whole world. I just wish they would have not stopped giving it the tweaks it needs so desperately. It wouldn't have taken very much. Not too much at all.

However, in the end, I simply am forced to start conquering the world, when I didn't want to. That means something is missing, and that is a more muscular peaceful side. Imho.

[mav3434]

Yeah, I usually try to go the peace route and consolidate a mighty but manageable empire. But after a while it just gets boring, and the AI will start attacking you eventually no matter what if you're big enough. So I agree with Old Bald Guy, the name of the game is Total War, so that's the way I end up even with the best of inentions.

[Knight of Nee]

Quote[/b] (Fate Amenable to Change @ Jan. 29 2003,00:21)]Interesting - my current (second game of MTW) is GA Byz.
Trying to setup to produce large trade income, but several times found that all my careful marriages, alliances, diplomancy, etc wasted when damn Italians sink one of my ships (thus declaring war) then every other power in Europe deserts me Can't reverse this until I eventually get them to agree to a ceasefire.
yeah this seems to happen in my games as well...but they wont agree to a ceasefire...not even wen i got them down to one province http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
and for the rest of the game nobody will ally with me..it just gets a bit annoying sometimes...i started a game acheivemnt game adn ended up with 60% of the world even tho i didnt really want it

[71-hour Ahmed]

hmmm....

everyone bar a few does the same including me...

build up desirable empire then take a smacking off the AI and go charging off to conquer half the world in the end, even if they didn't want to.

Obviously the game was playtested by the hypothetical shakespeare-writing monkeys and not human beings or they'd have noticed this. Its a bad game that forces you into an unnatural style. hmmpfh.

[Ligur]

Hmm not having read this thread I contemplated peace with the AI in my own thread above, Brutal DLX gave some very good hinters on how to play a GA game and NOT get into a massive war with everyone.

In my last game I wasn't that big myself, it was just that I kept all the AI factions pretty small by subterfuge (rebellions in right places) and crushed Byz, my only GA competitor, too early. So it ended up in an all out war anyway.

Just stating a new campaign and I swear I'll keep myself as small as possible, my only dread is this:

Everytime I turtle too much, leave the AI factions be and then go see the world some (usually Islamic) AI faction has conquered half the map and I am the only one who has any chance to stop them... Which will turn the game into a massive total war sooner or later.

.
.
.

[edit]Yep this is just what happened, the year is 1171 and the Turks own about 50% of the map. Here we go again.[edit]

[andrewt]

Kill everything. If I want peace and other stuff, I'd play MOO3, which I'm thinking of buying.

[NewJeffCT]

well, I normally like to start off slowly and build my navy and trading empire. So, I am normally behind quite a bit militarily. In my current campaign as the English in early, other than conquering Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Norway and Sweden, I did nothing until around 1220. Meanwhile, the Spanish were very aggressive early - wiping out the Almohads and Egyptians, and then starting a war with France, and going through the French all the way to almost wiping out the HRE. So, the Spanish controlled Aragon, France, all of Africa, a good part of the Middle East, and several provinces that started out under the HRE... So, other than the English Isles, 2 provinces in Scandanavia and Normandy, Anjou and Aquitine, I was pretty much a mid-level power behind Spain and the people of Novgorad (who controlled all of the eastern edge of the map to Byzantium...

[Shahed]

I'm happy as long as I can build , trade and watch the ecomnomy flourish. I'm happy if I can trian the best units available in adequate numbers to guarantee (sp) the defence of the empire.

[Goatus Maximus]

I usually like playing possum as a small-mid power until the Golden Horde come, regardless of which faction I play. Build up the trade, fend off the occassional attack, and up the tech...

Then, WHAMMO Start picking off the nearest factions, killing off the kings and princes (sending the faction off into the annals of history), and letting a couple of the provinces remain in the hands of the rebels. Then when the faction returns, they are neutral, severely weakened, and I'll get an immediate boost in trade from those neutral provinces.

By the end of the game, I like to have 8-10 factions remaining, all severely weakened and cowering before me Bwaaahahahaaaaa

[Pablo Sanchez]

I think its fun to try and only take control of those provinces which your faction might have some claim to. For example, as Danes, conquer the Baltic coast, Scandinavia, and the British Isles. The largest faction in this type of game would be Byzantium, which could support a claim for every part of the map that was once under the Romans http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Qilue]

I usually 'try' to be a middle power, but my expand, expand, expand mentality ends up annoying everybody and GA games turn into world conquest. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

ps
Which thread was that Ligur? I tried the search engine, but nothing seems close to what you mention about Brutal DLX's post on staying at peace in GA games.

[whiskeyjack]

hey
I voted for total annilihation. At first i used try and stay peaceful with everyone and build up trade and develop my provinces but then i decided whats the point of that? So now i start attacking from the start. Currently playing as england and have only the middle east to conquer to finish off. The game could delinetly do with an alternative to all out war. The whole trade thing can get really annoying especially whan you;ve built up some uber trading provinces and then someone sinks your ship http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif that really gets annoying after a while so its no wonder i feel like exacting revenge and conquering the world http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[insolent1]

I normally give up when it stops been a challenge & turns into a chour ie new buildings built takes 5 mins to get by & so on. I h8 having the biggest army in the game thats normally when I stop

[BDC]

As the Byzantiniums I am just trying to rebuild the Roman Empire... So not world domination then http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Axelthorpe]

I like to follow history, or do the things the kings and leaders tried to do. Like if I'm spain I try to unite the whole of spain, builds up a defence perimiter around, say Marocko, and tries to fight of the Turks and the French. And concentrate on building up the infastructure.

That's my goal; beeing a powerful nation, hopfully the richest and having the most loyal population.

I don't like the idea "conquer the whole world". It's much to easy to wage war and conquer provinces. The system in Europa Universalis II for example, is much better. Where you lose stability and reputation if you declare war, and you have to make a peace agreement to take over enemy territory, and if you sit there with really bad reputation, every little sh***y country is willing to wage war on you (not if you own half of Europe that is, but otherwise).

[Nowake]

I just stick to being the most important power; I let the other factions alive, as long as I have a good defense line in order to feel safe ... From time to time I just pick somebody and trash him out ...

[gaijinalways]

I just finished a GA Italian campaign on expert starting in early, and I turtled for over 200 years But, my cash, was only up over 100K or so. It was fun, but I also had to answer the Byz sinking my ships (we never met on the battlefield except through some provinces of theirs that rebelled, heh, heh.), they regretted it after they had none left

Then, I ended up winning with 60% in 1440 something as my trade dropped and my bank account went to 5K.

[Rowan11088]

Way to revive a very, very dead thread. The Forum Gods shalt smite ye if ye choose not to repent.

[SwordsMaster]

I try to get rsources, that means i try to get as many rich provinces as possible. So Venice, Constantinople, Valencia, Castile, Flanders, Antioch, ant the like are my firs targets..,If that implies growing big, well, i take the risk http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif
what i dont know is why im i ruined on the 2nd turn of the game i dont get wealthy until the victory is really secure (i own 50% of the map)?

Ahh,money....

[VikingHorde]

Most Powerful Amoung the Nations for me.

[Lord Ovaat]

My principle aim has always been to establish my faction as a thriving, secure, peaceful world power. Sorta like real life. Once I attain dominance, I quickly lose interest because it becomes rather boring and tedious. I use the philosophy, "I'm a relly nice guy. Screw with me and I'll kill you." http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/flat.gif

[Tricky Lady]

I like to play as a "leading" power. I get bored with any campaign when you're so big that everyone starts to hate you. But it's difficult to play a balanced game, because I mostly get attracted to make every backstabber pay dearly (sp?) for their mistakes... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-devil.gif

[Durruti]

I agree with Lord Romulus; it is more fun to pick your own goals & that these goals should be accessable through cultural & economic advancement as well as kicking ass. Yes, I hope the developers are listening. Rome failed because it failed to modernize economically-culturally(especially political culture).

Rome conquered, but created a desert in its wake. By the time Rome'rulers had conquered Carthage, they had repressed their local free citizens by destroying the Republic & converting the Senate & the rest of its government into spineless agents of the monied vested interests, outsourced jobs, & brought in slaves from its conquered colonies to work in car washes, corporate farms, & McDonalds at low wages. Rome also disarmed its citizens-against the protests of Thomas Jefferson (who believed that the people should be well armed & not the gov't).

The local farmers were destroyed, replaced with corporate agrobusinesses, & their sons drafted (& promised land & wealth in places they would occupy). The Gracchi brothers, Spartacus, & Ralph Nader were all repressed.

Rome's low cultural & low technology low-wage economy destroyed the early virile population. Everything manufactured except cars (er chariots) was imported from China where a large population labored for wages set by the gov't. Because of the availability of low paid (non-paid?) wage slaves, Rome's elite had no motivation to improve technology. Rome did not make anything, (except tanks & fighter aircraft & swords). It failed to industrialize (or de-industrialized). The ancient civs became an evolutionary dead-end. The Romans celebrated Christmas with Chinese made Santas, Christmas decorations, lights, Caesars, & Cleopatras.

Does this remind you of the situation of any current large "New World Order?"

The desert (Italy)was an economic vaccuum. Bread & circuses television, video games replaced human communication. Servility replaced independent dignity. The first tough-virile-relatively healthy population-culture from without (the Germans & the Huns) smacked the computor nerd-tv-Coluseum show addicts around & easily took over. They even got all the women. The 'Dark Ages' became a long transition period that found a way out of the dead- end, although at great cost. The industrial revolution-scientific-technological advance, political revolution -toward democracy, among other new developments, allowed the world to grow-The barbarians added new blood to the decadent civilization & (in the long run) helped revive it.

My point is (just what the hell is my point?). If RTW has a serious economic builder political-diplomacy side to accompany its eye-candy battle side, it will be a great game that will please almost all. I find an emphasis on just conquering (or just developing) to be a recipe for boredom & flirting with lesser games & even paying serious attention to our world & its problems or our families. Developers, please don't make us become better citizens; we only want the greatest game of all time from you; we expect nothing less.

All seriousness aside, RTW will be great & I will enjoy it.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[bighairyman]

I don't believe in World conquest. Think of how boring it will be if you are the president of the entire world. your days would be use entirely on domestic affairs. maybe it's just me, but having different countires makes a presidents job much easier, you can threaten people, declare war, gave parties, and the best part? you don't have to deal with his people's problems http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif

[makkyo]

It's really all or nothing for me... I kill ALL who dare to oppose me and my grand armies or I won't.... although I don't remember NOT killing everybody who's not me

[VikingHorde]

It's great fun to kill those backstabbers http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[kiwitt]

I chose small fry. I like to slowly build up my Provinces technically. (i.e. minimal troops and then build the forces I need)

I build enough peasants for garrison duty in early conquered provinces, and wait till they are @ 200% loyalty and can sustain Max taxes, before building them up more.

My Basic for conquered provinces is.

Fort, Border Forts, Inn, 20% farm, Town Watch, Wharf (if available), Trading Post (if available).

I may replace the peasants with Urban Militia, when the Loyalty is stable.

[JAG]

I like to systematically attack and take over the whole globe.

[Finn]

total annialation, i want everything, to fight until there is no-one left to fight

problem is total war is far too small :( doesnt last long enough to take over everything, especially as it usually doesnt take that long to reach "critical mass" where global conquest is (almost) completely inevitable.

now total war was smaller provences and covering the entire globe... that'd be excellent