Naked Fanatics

[[DnC]]

http://www.totalwar.com/community/rome.htm

Naked Fanatics

These are warriors among the barbarian ransk whose love of battle is such that they live for little else. Clad only in flimsy loinclothes, the fanatics whip themselfs into a frenzy by chanting, beating themselfs and drinking heavily. In this state they make an unnerving sight on the battlefield They are best sent into battle en masse, shocking the enemy by a ferocious charge, but they should be kept away from enemy cavalry.

They carry just swords and shields and have practically no discipline, but they can cause heavy cassualties among mist enemies. They fight mostly (if not completely) naked to emphasise their own fierceness and utter lack of fear. Scars and tattoos adorn their skin, and they let their hair grow wild. Only after a kill is their hair cut, often with a swordblade while standing over a freshly dead foe.

While their reckless courage is not in doubt, they can lack the cohesion and discipline to adept to setbacks, breaking and running in confusion when subjected to severe pressure.

- Impetuous.
- Hardy.
- Experts at Hiding in Forests.



I wonder how the last paragraph will be handled in the game.

[Ser Clegane]

Quote[/b] ]the fanatics whip themselves into a frenzy by chanting, beating themselves and drinking heavily

The ancestors of the modern football fanatic?

I already like them http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[frogbeastegg]

:waits for someone to point out that the name is wrong, since they are wearing a loin cloth, belt and sandals they aren't naked:

I wonder what will happen to these guys when fighting in snow? A special penalty 'hypothermia' perhaps? Maybe they will lose their chances of intimidating enemies because they will be stood about shivering? If they go to the desert they can get another special penalty 'sunburn'. They are classed as 'hardy' - running around like that they'd better be

[[DnC]]

Citaat[/b] (frogbeastegg @ April 21 2004,07:46)]I wonder what will happen to these guys when fighting in snow? A special penalty 'hypothermia' perhaps? Maybe they will lose their chances of intimidating enemies because they will be stood about shivering? If they go to the desert they can get another special penalty 'sunburn'. They are classed as 'hardy' - running around like that they'd better be

That's why they drink heavily frogbeastegg http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif Alcohol warms you up, at least with me http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif Not in the right way maybe, details details..

[Dead Moroz]

Another stupid name... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif

But the unit looks good. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Just like surfer.

[Basileus]

Quote[/b] (Dead Moroz @ April 21 2004,07:12)]Just like surfer.
hehe indeed, perhaps the shield is hes surfing board http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Voigtkampf]

Quote[/b] (frogbeastegg @ April 21 2004,06:46)]:waits for someone to point out that the name is wrong, since they are wearing a loin cloth, belt and sandals they aren't naked:

I wonder what will happen to these guys when fighting in snow? A special penalty 'hypothermia' perhaps? Maybe they will lose their chances of intimidating enemies because they will be stood about shivering? If they go to the desert they can get another special penalty 'sunburn'. They are classed as 'hardy' - running around like that they'd better be
Indeed. Well, perhaps they can get off with the excuse "well, it's cold, you normally it's…" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif Well, you get the point, I suppose. I bet Aryeh Nusbacher would cry dearly if he was to witness the dressed naked barbarians. Oh, well…

On the other side, I am starting to fear that there will be actually no fighting at all in R:TW, with all these experts in hiding in forests units…

Where is everyone? Hiding in forests, laying low to ambush all the other guys that are hiding in other forests and ambushing the first guys who are, you guess it, hidden in forest.

[Doug-Thompson]

Full frontal nudity would have gotten the game an "M" or worse. What is that rating for "Adults only?" I don't think I've ever seen one.

Can't produce a game Wal-Mart won't sell, you know.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (frogbeastegg @ April 21 2004,06:46)]:waits for someone to point out that the name is wrong, since they are wearing a loin cloth, belt and sandals they aren't naked:

I wonder what will happen to these guys when fighting in snow? A special penalty 'hypothermia' perhaps? Maybe they will lose their chances of intimidating enemies because they will be stood about shivering? If they go to the desert they can get another special penalty 'sunburn'. They are classed as 'hardy' - running around like that they'd better be
ROTFL http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-laugh4.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-laugh4.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-laugh4.gif Awesome, frogbeastegg http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

BTW, shouldn't the Roman designation be Geastati or something similar? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-thinking.gif

[lancelot]

I wish they will be able to scream "look at my big barbarian penis" as they charge..


Someone has got to get a copy of arych saying that and release it as a file for download http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Barkhorn1x]

Quote[/b] (lancelot @ April 21 2004,10:45)]I wish they will be able to scream "look at my big barbarian penis" as they charge..
Now that would be some funny s**t

And, BTW, DNC beat me to it today. Oh well, there is always tomorrow - and Friday.

Barkhorn.

[Spino]

Naked fanatical warriors running around in their birthday suits is one thing but shouldn't these guys be covered from head to toe in woad painted symbols?

Do any of the resident Celtic experts here in the Org care to comment on this?

[frogbeastegg]

Quote[/b] (lancelot @ April 21 2004,16:45)]I wish they will be able to scream "look at my big barbarian penis" as they charge..
:imagines hundreds of crazy warriors charging into battle yelling that...imagines a calm voice in the other army pointing out that they can't look because of the loin cloth...imagines charge slowly grinding to a halt, puzzled by this...imagines other army charging and killing confused naked fanatics who are busy pondering their clothing problem:
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Leet Eriksson]

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

[The_Emperor]

Remember "They don't look so hard with a Javelin sticking out of them"

[Axeknight]

What doesn't look so hard? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

[The Wizard]

barbarians... not that...

[shingenmitch2]

Nice unit. Props to the developers.

Good sword
Great shield
Hair spiked with lime nice touch.

Loin cloth... well, it's understood why this had to happen.

name? could be more interesting, but fits.

Woad painting? perhaps, but these are probably more Germanic and less Celtic, thus the lack of body paint. (maybe a shared unit, but that fine too.)

They've done a good job with this unit and the "night raider." -- although I'd have preferred a more interesting name for them as well. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Haethurn]

Quote[/b] (Doug-Thompson @ April 21 2004,09:41)]Full frontal nudity would have gotten the game an "M" or worse. What is that rating for "Adults only?" I don't think I've ever seen one.

Can't produce a game Wal-Mart won't sell, you know.
Actually, it is a myth that Wal-Mart does not sell "M" rated games. They sell almost every one of them. For all of their propaganda about being a conservative, family-friendly store, the fact is that they stock every kind of "obscene" entertainment to make a quick buck. It's actually quite ridiculous to think that they don't sell "M" rated games. That would be such a horrible business plan.

[Doug-Thompson]

Actually, M-rated games accounted for only 11.9 percent of computer and console games sold in 2003, according to industry figures.

Which means if you take out "Grand Theft Auto," they didn't sell any. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

The figures are for new unit sales, not price, though, if I remember correctly.

[Haethurn]

Quote[/b] (Doug-Thompson @ April 21 2004,16:19)]Actually, M-rated games accounted for only 11.9 percent of computer and console games sold in 2003, according to industry figures.

Which means if you take out "Grand Theft Auto," they didn't sell any. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

The figures are for new unit sales, not price, though, if I remember correctly.
Well, they make a profit on it, however small, or else they wouldn't continue selling them. If they did stop selling them, it would be because there is no profit in it, not because of any genuine concern over children playing violent games or any such nonsense like that. There really is little room for morality in business except as part of the advertising plan.

Note: I'm not against children playing "violent" games, if my posts seem to suggest that. I do not believe that they make children aggressive or desensitized. In fact, I see that in a school setting, the gamers are always the ones being harrassed and beaten up by far more aggressive and mean non-gamers. I would say that the most violent and aggressive people in this world are the ones who have never played a violent game, never watched a violent movie, and never read a violent book.

I'm just saying that the idea that Wal-Mart does not sell "M" rated games is a popular myth that I try to fight wherever possible. I wish I knew how they got that crazy idea

[DemonArchangel]

they should just put a sign over it that reads "censored"

[RisingSun]

I think they should get some other penalties when it is cold out. Just imagine Aryeh's comment in that situation

"Look at my big bar- Oh my God no Shrinkage"







Obviously I'm talking about the leather loincloth. What were you pervs thinking? Sickos.

[Hakonarson]

What a load of tripe.

the "naked fanatics" Gaestati at Telamon in 225 BC stood with excellent order - individuals were provoked to charge by missiles.

the "Naked Fantic" Galatians were fierce - but so were all Gallic warriors, and thse guys also proved vulnerable to missiles, failed to deficively defeat the Greeks about 280BC-ish, and hardly fought at all against the romans in 189BC.

They did inflict some defeats on Seleucid armies, but we don't know much about that and their main claim to fame was being defeated at "the elephant battle".

This unit rates an "D" - saved from being an "F" only because the stated purpose of fighting naked to show bravery and disdain for enemy is correct

[Scipio]

I still cant even see it Why do I always get these pics delayed? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

[PSYCHO]

It’s not Friday yet?, when did these guys come out?...anyways, my belated 2bob..



Great unit CA (… at least on the face of it)

I’m hoping that given the ‘British Blue’, they are a Briton unit. A ‘British’ version of the Gallic Gaesatae included for gameplay considerations. This would explain why they are NOT named by the obvious term Gaesatae. It’d also explain why they haven’t been given the exact same characteristics as the Gallic Gaesatae as mentioned in classical texts. Not ideal but understandable if so.



If the “Naked Fanatic” is a Briton:

The Good:

#1 Bloody beautiful render of a Celtic shield. Who ever programmed this detailed artwork deserves a pay rise or three http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
#2 Celtic long sword
#3 Spiky hair looks good visually
#4 Moral “loincloth” (phew) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif
#5 Nice facial, chest and leg rendering
#6 Have I mentioned the fantastic shield?
#7 Be a great unit for gameplay and will look stunning charging across the battlefield

The Bad / Concerns & minor suggestions:

#1 Roman sandals. Give him shoes.
#2 Beard. Britons in this period NEVER wore beards. Why foggy the historic faction distinction unnecessarily? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif
#3 No Torque.
#4 No woad / tats.
#5 No Armbands.
#6 German attributes? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

“They let their hair grow wild. Only after a kill is their hair cut, often with a sword blade while standing over a freshly dead foe” –“Naked Fanatic” descript, CA

“There is one custom that has become a general rule among the Chatti. As soon as they reach manhood they let their hair and beard grow as they will. This fashion of covering the face is assumed in accordance with a vow pledging them to the service of valour; and only when they have slain an enemy do they lay it aside. Standing over the bloody corpse they have despoiled, they reveal their faces to the world once more, and proclaim that they have at last repaid the debt they owe….” - Germania, XXXI, Tacitus.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-no.gif Guess we can kiss those great German Chatii units goodbye?

#7 Interesting physiology. They have removed his butt and used it to create a second set of shoulder blades.
#8 Sword could be a foot longer.
#9 Would be nice to have a scabbard, looking a bit too ‘naked.’
#10 Name not ideal but sufficient.
#11 Descript vague.



As I have mentioned, I think these are Britons but I do have doubts..

“There are warriors among the Barbarian ranks…” – CA descript

I hope this is not alluding to the “Naked Fanatics” becoming a generic ‘barbarian’ unit. It would be a great disappointment if CA do not depict a proper Gallic Gaesatae unit…and an even greater travesty if these units are readily available to the Germans, Darcians, Iberians etc as well.

If these are a shared unit between the Gauls and Britons why not just name them Gaesatae and depict them as such. It sure would make it easier for CA to explain to the kiddies why the “Naked Fanatics” aren’t really naked and not all that fanatical, just the ancient version of inebriated football players. Hmmm, drunk, scantily clad footy players?, ..I guess that could be regarded as an “unnerving sight”. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

“Naked Fanatics…Clad only in flimsy loincloths…(blah blah blah)…they fight mostly (if not completely) naked …they whip themselves up into a frenzy by chanting…and drinking heavily” –“Naked Fanatic” descript, CA

What are they fanatical about…drink and 'whipping'? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (PSYCHO @ April 22 2004,09:10)]Great unit CA (… at least on the face of it)

I’m hoping that given the ‘British Blue’, they are a Briton unit. A ‘British’ version of the Gallic Gaesatae included for gameplay considerations. This would explain why they are NOT named by the obvious term Gaesatae. It’d also explain why they haven’t been given the exact same characteristics as the Gallic Gaesatae as mentioned in classical texts. Not ideal but understandable if so.



If the “Naked Fanatic” is a Briton:

The Good:

#1 Bloody beautiful render of a Celtic shield. Who ever programmed this detailed artwork deserves a pay rise or three http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
#2 Celtic long sword
#3 Spiky hair looks good visually
#4 Moral “loincloth” (phew) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif
#5 Nice facial, chest and leg rendering
#6 Have I mentioned the fantastic shield?
#7 Be a great unit for gameplay and will look stunning charging across the battlefield

The Bad / Concerns & minor suggestions:

#1 Roman sandals. Give him shoes.
#2 Beard. Britons in this period NEVER wore beards. Why foggy the historic faction distinction unnecessarily? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif
#3 No Torque.
#4 No woad / tats.
#5 No Armbands.
#6 German attributes? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

“They let their hair grow wild. Only after a kill is their hair cut, often with a sword blade while standing over a freshly dead foe” –“Naked Fanatic” descript, CA

“There is one custom that has become a general rule among the Chatti. As soon as they reach manhood they let their hair and beard grow as they will. This fashion of covering the face is assumed in accordance with a vow pledging them to the service of valour; and only when they have slain an enemy do they lay it aside. Standing over the bloody corpse they have despoiled, they reveal their faces to the world once more, and proclaim that they have at last repaid the debt they owe….” - Germania, XXXI, Tacitus.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-no.gif Guess we can kiss those great German Chatii units goodbye?

#7 Interesting physiology. They have removed his butt and used it to create a second set of shoulder blades.
#8 Sword could be a foot longer.
#9 Would be nice to have a scabbard, looking a bit too ‘naked.’
#10 Name not ideal but sufficient.
#11 Descript vague.



As I have mentioned, I think these are Britons but I do have doubts..

“There are warriors among the Barbarian ranks…” – CA descript

I hope this is not alluding to the “Naked Fanatics” becoming a generic ‘barbarian’ unit. It would be a great disappointment if CA do not depict a proper Gallic Gaesatae unit…and an even greater travesty if these units are readily available to the Germans, Darcians, Iberians etc as well.

If these are a shared unit between the Gauls and Britons why not just name them Gaesatae and depict them as such. It sure would make it easier for CA to explain to the kiddies why the “Naked Fanatics” aren’t really naked and not all that fanatical, just the ancient version of inebriated football players. Hmmm, drunk, scantily clad footy players?, ..I guess that could be regarded as an “unnerving sight”. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

“Naked Fanatics…Clad only in flimsy loincloths…(blah blah blah)…they fight mostly (if not completely) naked …they whip themselves up into a frenzy by chanting…and drinking heavily” –“Naked Fanatic” descript, CA

What are they fanatical about…drink and 'whipping'? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
Good points as always, PSYCHO http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-thumbsup.gif

I have to agree with the double shoulder-blades thing. I hadn't noticed it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-oops.gif

The shield, as you say, is awesome http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif


But, I must disagree with you on one point. If they were exclusivelly a Briton unit they would probably have woad, no beard and armbands.

Since they also have a number of characteristics comon to several cultures, you can bet the they will be a generic Barbarian unit. So, no Chatii or Gaesatae... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-cry.gif
The name implies this too. They are not Briton Naked Fanatics or something like that. So, they are probably common to Celtic and German cultures... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-bigcry.gif

[PSYCHO]

I know, just giving them the benefit of the doubt

To not include them ? Both the Gaesatae and Chatii would add sooooo much to gameplay.

"This nation (Chatii) is distinguished by hardy bodies, well-knit limbs, fierce countenances, and unusual mental vigour. They have plenty of judgement and discernment. They appoint picked men to lead units, and they obey them. They know how to keep rank, and how to recognise an opportunity, or else delay an attack.They map out the duties of the day and make sure the defences by works at night.

All their strength lies in their infantry, which, in addition to its arms, is burdened with entrenching tools and provisions. Other tribes may be seen going forth to battle, the Chatii come out for a campaign. They seldom engage in swift rushes or in casual fighting. Speed to them suggests something very like fear, whereas deliberate organised movement indicates a steady courage and resolve."
(Tacitus, Germania, XXX)

Well mate, if the Chatii and Gaesatae are omitted, someone over at CA is just {edit*} rather foolhardy {*edit}

my2bob

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (PSYCHO @ April 22 2004,10:03)]I know, just giving them the benefit of the doubt

To not include them ? Both the Gaesatae and Chatii would add sooooo much to gameplay.

"This nation (Chatii) is distinguished by hardy bodies, well-knit limbs, fierce countenances, and unusual mental vigour. They have plenty of judgement and discernment. They appoint picked men to lead units, and they obey them. They know how to keep rank, and how to recognise an opportunity, or else delay an attack.They map out the duties of the day and make sure the defences by works at night.

All their strength lies in their infantry, which, in addition to its arms, is burdened with entrenching tools and provisions. Other tribes may be seen going forth to battle, the Chatii come out for a campaign. They seldom engage in swift rushes or in casual fighting. Speed to them suggests something very like fear, whereas deliberate organised movement indicates a steady courage and resolve."
(Tacitus, Germania, XXX)
Good info



Quote[/b] ]Well mate, if the Chatii and Gaesatae are omitted, someone over at CA is just a bloody idiot
You still doubt it? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-surprised.gif

[Spino]

Quote[/b] ]Quote
Well mate, if the Chatii and Gaesatae are omitted, someone over at CA is just a bloody idiot

You still doubt it?

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

Whoa, easy guys. That's uncalled for. You don't honestly mean that do you? Properly named units or not I'll bet when RTW hits the shelves both of you will frothing at the mouth and counting the minutes until it you install it onto your respective systems.

[Voigtkampf]

Personally, I believe that when people are bashing the R:TW because of historical inaccuracies, they are mostly letting off steam because they can't play R:TW yet After all, it could hardly be polite to call anyone "bloody idiot", even under those hypothetical circumstances, i.e. "if they do that or don't do that". So, hence I know that all of the people that visit these forums are nice by nature, I don't take anything for granted, but little fine tuning of the posts could defiantly do no harm http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Spino @ April 22 2004,16:24)]
Quote[/b] ]Quote
Well mate, if the Chatii and Gaesatae are omitted, someone over at CA is just a bloody idiot

You still doubt it?

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

Whoa, easy guys. That's uncalled for. You don't honestly mean that do you? Properly named units or not I'll bet when RTW hits the shelves both of you will frothing at the mouth and counting the minutes until it you install it onto your respective systems.
I only comented on the SOMEONE part, not the ALL part. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink.gif

As for RTW, I still have to decide from what we'll see in the near future...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (voigtkampf @ April 22 2004,16:38)]Personally, I believe that when people are bashing the R:TW because of historical inaccuracies, they are mostly letting off steam because they can't play R:TW yet After all, it could hardly be polite to call anyone "bloody idiot", even under those hypothetical circumstances, i.e. "if they do that or don't do that". So, hence I know that all of the people that visit these forums are nice by nature, I don't take anything for granted, but little fine tuning of the posts could defiantly do no harm http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif
I agree that they're not bloody idiots. But some bloody idiot is pressuring CA's guys to make such stupid "marketing" decisions. That's that...

[Longshanks]

Wasn't the spiking of hair with lyme an exclusively Gallic custom, or am I mistaken? If it is exclusively Gallic it might be safe to assume that the Naked Fanatic is one of Gaul's unique units.

The Germans sometimes dyed their hair red though.

[PSYCHO]

Quote[/b] (voigtkampf @ April 22 2004,16:38)]"Personally, I believe that when people are bashing the R:TW because of historical inaccuracies, they are mostly letting off steam because they can't play R:TW yet" - voigtkampf


No one is bashing RTW, this has nothing to do with “letting off steam because ..(we) can’t play” and it’s not just about “historical inaccuracies”. This is a pragmatic comment about a hypothetical decision to omit two of the most well documented, important and central units for the Celts and Germans (an unwelcome precedent imho). These guys would add so much to unit diversity and gameplay and it would be bloody idiotic to ignore them when it seems CA have had to be creative to fill out the unit rosters.

I have feared from the outset that CA will just depict the “Barbarians” (in particular the Celts & Germans) as generic stupid hordes of Neanderthals. This was not always the case, as testified by history. As many have argued for months now, CA could use some of the accounts of various groups / tribes to create an interesting, balanced diversity without erring too much from reality.

This is about gameplay To make each faction fun and interesting, it needs a good selection of available units. The model is the same regardless of whether we’re talking about Celts , Greeks or Romans etc. Ideally, you need some sort of cavalry unit, some sort of skirmish unit, some light infantry, some heavy infantry and some sort of elite assault troops. If you reduce troop diversity / balance you create a situation whereby the player / AI can employ a tried and tested tactic that will defeat the limited faction every time, the later unable to counter that tactic due to it lacking the require counter units. We’d be unhappy if a Macedonian army could only field heavy phalanx. The same idea goes for the Celts and Germans. I fear CA are hell bent on producing the ‘great hand to hand charge’ / ‘low battle stamina’ / “Good at hiding in Forests” units enmasse and ignoring all other characteristics attributed to them by history. All this does is force the “barbarians’ to basically employ one tactic which would get rather boring and repetitive, get big numbers, rush, kill. No tactical options, no battlefield finesse, no captivating gameplay.
It would be extremely idiotic to ignore the opportunity provided by history to make this game fun and gameplay balanced …after all, it is a game that’s meant to entertain

Whilst I understand my comment could be taken as inflammatory, in context, I still stand by it.

my2bob

[Voigtkampf]

Hehe, PYSCHO, no one is limiting your right of free expression, just please omit phrases like "bloody idiots" and such, your karma suffers from it I don't have any problems with criticism, but it should be a positive criticism, not an impolite one. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Dead Moroz]

Quote[/b] (voigtkampf @ April 23 2004,10:34)]Hehe, PYSCHO, no one is limiting your right of free expression, just please omit phrases like "bloody idiots" and such, your karma suffers from it I don't have any problems with criticism, but it should be a positive criticism, not an impolite one. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Yes, PYSCHO, use just "idiots" instead of "bloody idiots". It would be more politically correct. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-toff.gif

[PSYCHO]

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif I think my karma was stuffed a long time ago voigtkampf.

As to the aforementioned adjective/s, I've often called my best mates "Bloody Idiots".. struth, I've even been known to call myself a "Bloody Idiot" for the way I obsess over historical details in RTW. Just see it as an Aussie term of endearment. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-builder.gif .....but then, contemplating the way we run this planet, aren't we all just a bunch of "Bloody Idiots"

...ooo don't I feel all tough and rebel like http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

(*psycho's 'ego' lodges a complaint with 'super ego' ....who in turn, begins to beat 'Id' about the head* ...."Stupid 'Id' Idiot")


You are of course right voigtkampf. Point noted, apologies.

(*Drags 'Id' back into the dark recesses of psycho's unconsciousness and attaches a beer drip; meanwhile 'ego' installs geographical language filter*)

... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif ..arr

[PSYCHO]

Official apology if any offense taken by my comments, wasn't the intent.

[Voigtkampf]

Just take it easy, PSYCHO, I know damn good how people can go up like a rocket over something that should obviously be a simple joke, so the safest way is to use neutral terms. After all, we don't want to chase away the CA staff entirely from these boards, don't we? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

And, who knows, perhaps they could get mad and really introduce druids, magical potions and Egyptian mummies in the game - now, that is a scary thought http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_scared.gif

[SwordsMaster]

Any modder can tell you guys that it isnt easy at all just to change existing stuff. Can you just imagine how hard it is to create new units?program them, their specific stats, they looks and everything. Thousands of pages of code.

So they could be lazy, but not idiots. And all those barbaric-specific units will come with mods and expansions as they always did.

BTW if you want a Rome SIMULATOR then it will not be what you get. CA is making a game based in reality, not remaking reality as it was 2000 years ago.

Sorry for all the excitement, but im kindof programmer and that hurts me deep, coz its LOADS of hours and pages of work to get something working.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-computer.gif

[PSYCHO]

Not a prob voigtkampf.




Quote[/b] ]“If you want a Rome SIMULATOR then it will not be what you get. CA is making a game based in reality, not remaking reality as it was 2000 years ago.” – SwordsMaster

I hear where your coming from but no one is asking for a history “Simulator”. Please please understand this crucial point. This is about GAMEPLAY

The Total War series has been a great success thus far and much of that success can be attributed to the underlying tactical philosophies governing gameplay. In essence, a big part of what makes the games FUN

As CA have often mentioned themselves, the “rock, paper, and scissors” theory embodied in each faction’s unit list offers opportunity and great flexibility to formulate effective, creative, and often unorthodox solutions to military challenges. For example, you could play a faction in MTW that could / did have, but wasn’t particularly renowned for, it’s Pike units. When attacked by an enemy fielding heavy horse, you at least have the opportunity to create the said units to counter this enemy threat. No they may not have the great Swiss Pikemen, but a ‘lower quality’ pike unit could be raised nonetheless. This model promoted great gameplay.

In RTW it should be no different. Factions that could / did employ certain units / tactics should be able to achieve the same end. My great fear is that in a bid to overtly distinguish factions in RTW, the Celts and Germans are going to be depicted as a horde of mindless ‘peasants’. The unit descripts’ and comments from CA tend to suggest the like:


Quote[/b] ]“In gameplay terms, these various factions can be split into a number of groups that have different strengths and weaknesses. The barbarian factions tend to have cruder technology….The barbarians tend toward unsophisticated hordes of head-bashers with a few elite units of chosen axemen or berserkers” - Jerome Grasdyke, Lead Programmer, Creative AssemblyGamespot preview (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/rometotalwar/preview_6093949.html)


This over simplification comes at a huge cost to gameplay and is counter to much of what has made TW successful.

Many here have argued for months now that CA should take the opportunity to stay true to that proven “rock, paper, scissors” theory and develop diverse units based on historical ‘tribal’ / regional differences. The Germans should get the discipline heavy Chatii infantry, the Gauls the Gaesatae assault units etc etc. The Celts and Germans should be able to build a diverse array of different troop types with different abilities. They should get the disciplined units, the heavy infantry etc as well. The Celts should be able to form testudo, shield walls and phalanx etc. History provides all the ingredients necessary for great gameplay, all CA need do is take the opportunity. The alternative is un-historical repetitive / boring limitation. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

And before someone makes the comment, in order to maintain the feel of the period and NOT have the “barbarians” becoming an unstoppable force (ie. Maintaining Rome’s military dominance etc) all that needs to be done is for CA to make the bulk of the ‘elite’ / non-horde “barbarian” units available only with the later techs and larger resources.

Just imagine how annoying it would be to reach the end-game and have your glorious German / Celtic Empire stretch across the ancient world, treasuries overflowing, yet you are only able to build the “unsophisticated hordes of head-bashers”?



Quote[/b] ]“So they could be lazy, but not idiots..” – SwordsMaster

I’d hardly call them lazy, they have after all basically pioneered a whole genre themselves and developed a game that will change the industry forever, if not already. And no, you could not define them all as idiots for similar reasons but that does not prevent them from making mistakes. To err is human, and whilst I do occasionally suspect deification, I believe CA are still human.



Quote[/b] ]“And all those barbaric-specific units will come with mods and expansions as they always did” – SwordsMaster

The problem with leaving key gameplay considerations to an expansion is that it stuffs up the gameplay in the “NOW” It basically becomes a patch for a key component that would have been better included from the outset. Just like CA, I want RTW to be as big of a success as possible. They have the skill, the resources, time and desire to create something truly epic in the history of computer gaming. The issue of “barbarian” unit diversity / complexity is a feature which will dramatically add or detract from that goal

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (PSYCHO @ April 29 2004,22:30)]Not a prob voigtkampf.




Quote[/b] ]“If you want a Rome SIMULATOR then it will not be what you get. CA is making a game based in reality, not remaking reality as it was 2000 years ago.” – SwordsMaster

I hear where your coming from but no one is asking for a history “Simulator”. Please please understand this crucial point. This is about GAMEPLAY

The Total War series has been a great success thus far and much of that success can be attributed to the underlying tactical philosophies governing gameplay. In essence, a big part of what makes the games FUN

As CA have often mentioned themselves, the “rock, paper, and scissors” theory embodied in each faction’s unit list offers opportunity and great flexibility to formulate effective, creative, and often unorthodox solutions to military challenges. For example, you could play a faction in MTW that could / did have, but wasn’t particularly renowned for, it’s Pike units. When attacked by an enemy fielding heavy horse, you at least have the opportunity to create the said units to counter this enemy threat. No they may not have the great Swiss Pikemen, but a ‘lower quality’ pike unit could be raised nonetheless. This model promoted great gameplay.

In RTW it should be no different. Factions that could / did employ certain units / tactics should be able to achieve the same end. My great fear is that in a bid to overtly distinguish factions in RTW, the Celts and Germans are going to be depicted as a horde of mindless ‘peasants’. The unit descripts’ and comments from CA tend to suggest the like:


Quote[/b] ]“In gameplay terms, these various factions can be split into a number of groups that have different strengths and weaknesses. The barbarian factions tend to have cruder technology….The barbarians tend toward unsophisticated hordes of head-bashers with a few elite units of chosen axemen or berserkers” - Jerome Grasdyke, Lead Programmer, Creative AssemblyGamespot preview (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/rometotalwar/preview_6093949.html)


This over simplification comes at a huge cost to gameplay and is counter to much of what has made TW successful.

Many here have argued for months now that CA should take the opportunity to stay true to that proven “rock, paper, scissors” theory and develop diverse units based on historical ‘tribal’ / regional differences. The Germans should get the discipline heavy Chatii infantry, the Gauls the Gaesatae assault units etc etc. The Celts and Germans should be able to build a diverse array of different troop types with different abilities. They should get the disciplined units, the heavy infantry etc as well. The Celts should be able to form testudo, shield walls and phalanx etc. History provides all the ingredients necessary for great gameplay, all CA need do is take the opportunity. The alternative is un-historical repetitive / boring limitation. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

And before someone makes the comment, in order to maintain the feel of the period and NOT have the “barbarians” becoming an unstoppable force (ie. Maintaining Rome’s military dominance etc) all that needs to be done is for CA to make the bulk of the ‘elite’ / non-horde “barbarian” units available only with the later techs and larger resources.

Just imagine how annoying it would be to reach the end-game and have your glorious German / Celtic Empire stretch across the ancient world, treasuries overflowing, yet you are only able to build the “unsophisticated hordes of head-bashers”?



Quote[/b] ]“So they could be lazy, but not idiots..” – SwordsMaster

I’d hardly call them lazy, they have after all basically pioneered a whole genre themselves and developed a game that will change the industry forever, if not already. And no, you could not define them all as idiots for similar reasons but that does not prevent them from making mistakes. To err is human, and whilst I do occasionally suspect deification, I believe CA are still human.



Quote[/b] ]“And all those barbaric-specific units will come with mods and expansions as they always did” – SwordsMaster

The problem with leaving key gameplay considerations to an expansion is that it stuffs up the gameplay in the “NOW” It basically becomes a patch for a key component that would have been better included from the outset. Just like CA, I want RTW to be as big of a success as possible. They have the skill, the resources, time and desire to create something truly epic in the history of computer gaming. The issue of “barbarian” unit diversity / complexity is a feature which will dramatically add or detract from that goal
I agree interelly, although not just about the gameplay factor.

[Swoosh So]

Youre all bloody idiots http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

I can see it now on the first multiplayer day of rome totalwar while your all zooming in to check out footwear ill be flanking you http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Swoosh So @ May 01 2004,06:06)]Youre all bloody idiots http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif
Oh, the lack of understanding... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-cry.gif



Quote[/b] ]I can see it now on the first multiplayer day of rome totalwar while your all zooming in to check out footwear ill be flanking you http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif
That won't happen...


Do you know why?



I NEVER play MP... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wink.gif

[Voigtkampf]

Quote[/b] (Swoosh So @ May 01 2004,06:06)]Youre all bloody idiots http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

I can see it now on the first multiplayer day of rome totalwar while your all zooming in to check out footwear ill be flanking you http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif
My dear, that is utterly inappropriate, taking on an uncivilized and, furthermore, unsportsmanlike flank attack while I admire their nifty sandals. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_charge.gif

Oh, well, some people simply fail to acknowledge the finer points of fashion trends, as well as their unexpected revivals. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-toff.gif

[Swoosh So]

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

[The Wizard]

If they have a nice ladder system Swoosh, does it matter? A bit of historical accuracy-abusing won't hurt... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif



~Wiz