Gameplay or Historical accuracy?

[hellenes]

Ive read many threads discussing the historical accuracy and the gameplay of RTW and the devs stated that gameplay comes first. So IMHO the option that would satisfy both sides would be the moddability of the game. The devs want to have gladiators OK with me as long as i can change the skins of the units until the last polygon so that i can make a mod that i think being more "historically accurate", I dont like the anachronistic egyptian units? OK as long as i can change the prod files and make egypt another successor kingdom clone(phalanx macedonian cav etc etc)...And speaking of clones an option that we could add a pool of faces that the individual soldiers will take would solve the anti clone war protest (although in that case the protesters would have to spend a decent amount of money to upgrade their machines to run such an option http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )
The list goes further and further with the ability of the addition of: new factions,religions/cultures,orders from the senate/other like GA the control over events respwaning factions the addition of more new units...

ps Feel free to add your own http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Thomas Davie]

I want a nice map and scenario editor that other people will use to give me all of the historical battle te refight http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I want to be able to eliminate the flaming pigs, remove the dogs and tone down the number of elephants. I would like to have some Rome only campaigns, such as the Social and Civil wars.

Tom

[Oaty]

If it were historically accurate wouldnt the Romans stomp over everyone and the only way of defeat is the Roman Empire internal political defeat?

[lonewolf371]

That was only because Caesar came along, the rest of the Roman "conquests" were more a bunch of colonies outside of Rome and a bunch of city-states in Italy which were more "allies" throughout the Republic than actual subjects. Augustus still managed to get two legions annihilated in Germany, Caesar killed off a good number of soldiers during his campaigns, and Crassus practically lost a consular army. This was not the Rome of the Emperors mind you, it was still only a moderately-sized empire, before Pompey's conquests it only had Greece, the Italian city-states and the holdings of Carthage, Pompey and Caesar only added parts of Anatolia, Israel, and Gaul. Obviously Gaul ended up being the most wealthy and the hardest to conquer. And yet Rome did still bleed for its conquests, whether you know much of it or not, and many barbarian incursions in both Africa and Germany also threatened the empire, Marius had to repulse large numbers of Germans invading Italy at one point and also had to fight a long Guerilla war against Jugerthia. The empire began falling apart after 100 BC and obviously to reflect this were the Civil Wars and Caesar and Sulla's marches on Rome. Rome was not the peacefully-expanding monolith of war and destruction that most people see it as.