RTW and historical accuracy

[CrackedAxe]

Sorry if you're already sick of this topic but I just have to put in my 2 pennies worth. It's interesting how worked up peeps are getting over the whole egyptian faction thing, demanding accuracy from the developers and this and other points. To some extent I absolutely agree, Old Kingdom Egyptian units in Classical historical times is a bit laughable, sort of like having Roman legions in VI, but this is a GAME, not an educational tool, and we've been living with this for as long as the total war series has been on our HD's. Example: In VI, we have cavalry units for all factions. Cavalry in dark age Britain it did'nt exist Saxon Thegns of the time had to have horses to fulfil their military obligations to their lord or king, but they only ever rode these TO battle, and dismounted to fight. This was for good reason, the horses in Britain at the time were not strong enough to carry armed and armoured men. The normans did have such horses though, in the squat, muscular norman warhorse (they had been learning cavalry tactics from the french for some time. It was'nt until after Norman conquest of Britain that we had horses of strong enough racial stock to start breeding cavalry capable gee gees over here (strangely enough we did'nt pick up the habit from the Romans, but then, their cav was pretty crap). Until then Britons always fought in the static, rigid infantry formations of the 'shield fort' (i forget the Saxon term), so battles would have been NOTHING like what we see in VI. this would'nt have been fun for us gamers though, so understandably the devs went for gameplay over accuracy, which is fine by me. They are making a product for the mass market, not a minority of history buffs and doing a fine job of it. The Total War series is easily the best strat series available on the PC, and I cant wait for RTW, despite the carping and criticisms (would you rather it did'nt come out at all?).

BTW this is my first proper post, do you like it? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Hope i hav'nt sent u all to ----> http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-zzz.gif

[tombom]

You have http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif . It really helps if you split up the lines into paragraphs (not that I do, of course...). Welcome

[CrackedAxe]

I know m8, i do a degree in dramatic writing believe it or not, but i'm at work and in a real hurry (here's the boss agh)

[KukriKhan]

I see you've been registered for a month, but just in case we missed you before:

Welcome to the .Org CrackedAxe.

This topic generates much heat, but not much light elsewhere in our forums, so one word of caution to all:

Further discussion of this topic MUST remain civil here. This is the Entrance Hall, where new members get a chance to acquire the feel of the .Org in a safe, flame-free environment. Thanks to all in advance for keeping that in mind.

[Lil' Timmy]

kukrikhan.. don't you think the young kids should also get a taste of what the real forum is like too http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-fireman.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-fireman.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif

[tombom]

Quote[/b] (Lil' Timmy @ June 20 2004,15:33)]kukrikhan.. don't you think the young kids should also get a taste of what the real forum is like too http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-fireman.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-fireman.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-argue.gif
Umm... most other forums are fine. It depends what you mean by real forum.

I agree with CrackedAxe. I enjoy history, but it doesn't mean everything has to be accurate. Although I understand about one or two things.

[Lil' Timmy]

it was supposed to be a joke tombom http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[tombom]

Quote[/b] (Lil' Timmy @ June 20 2004,16:37)]it was supposed to be a joke tombom http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif
I guess i just didn't understand it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[IrishMike]

I just want a solid game that is more of a combat accurate than a historically accurate game. So that they make it accurate in terms of tactics and actuall combat not where archers are unfairly powerful and situations like that.

[tombom]

Quote[/b] (ColdKnight @ June 20 2004,18:33)]I just want a solid game that is more of a combat accurate than a historically accurate game. So that they make it accurate in terms of tactics and actuall combat not where archers are unfairly powerful and situations like that.
Exactly what I want. I'd prefer a good, solid game to a totally historically accurate one, as this can always be modded ater if needed.

[ah_dut]

Quote[/b] (CrackedAxe @ June 20 2004,16:03)]Sorry if you're already sick of this topic but I just have to put in my 2 pennies worth. It's interesting how worked up peeps are getting over the whole egyptian faction thing, demanding accuracy from the developers and this and other points. To some extent I absolutely agree, Old Kingdom Egyptian units in Classical historical times is a bit laughable, sort of like having Roman legions in VI, but this is a GAME, not an educational tool, and we've been living with this for as long as the total war series has been on our HD's. Example: In VI, we have cavalry units for all factions. Cavalry in dark age Britain it did'nt exist Saxon Thegns of the time had to have horses to fulfil their military obligations to their lord or king, but they only ever rode these TO battle, and dismounted to fight. This was for good reason, the horses in Britain at the time were not strong enough to carry armed and armoured men. The normans did have such horses though, in the squat, muscular norman warhorse (they had been learning cavalry tactics from the french for some time. It was'nt until after Norman conquest of Britain that we had horses of strong enough racial stock to start breeding cavalry capable gee gees over here (strangely enough we did'nt pick up the habit from the Romans, but then, their cav was pretty crap). Until then Britons always fought in the static, rigid infantry formations of the 'shield fort' (i forget the Saxon term), so battles would have been NOTHING like what we see in VI. this would'nt have been fun for us gamers though, so understandably the devs went for gameplay over accuracy, which is fine by me. They are making a product for the mass market, not a minority of history buffs and doing a fine job of it. The Total War series is easily the best strat series available on the PC, and I cant wait for RTW, despite the carping and criticisms (would you rather it did'nt come out at all?).

BTW this is my first proper post, do you like it? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Hope i hav'nt sent u all to ----> http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-zzz.gif
who cares we need our cav. U're way wrong bout roman cav though, by the end they had hunnicand gothic cav which was tres bon

[CrackedAxe]

Quote[/b] ]who cares we need our cav Pretty much the point of my post.


Quote[/b] ]by the end they had hunnicand gothic cav which was tres bonThese were never seen in Roman Britain.

Thanks for the contribution anyway m8/ http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Jason the Absentminded]

I agree that game play/tactics is the most important aspect of any military strategy game. At the same time, I'm also anal about historical accuracy. I will definitely get RTW, but I will probably back off from playing it a lot until it's modded.

[IrishMike]

Well one thing we can all agree on is that if the Egyptian units are old and outdated, then it should be a great challange for all to beat the more advanced units.

[Armchair Athlete]

I like the fact the Egyptians have old units...it will make them so much easier to conquer with my Seleucid's Anyone else think the Seleucid's will be an interesting faction?
Elephants, Heavy Pikemen, Imitation Legionnaires, probably some form of Eastern Archer and Horse Archer, (Silician pirates?) they should be great fun However I think they will be the HRE of RTW, enemies on all sides waiting to tear them to pieces.

[Zanderpants]

Seriously I was reading a post in the Colosseum, and people in there were talking about how they were jaded with RTW already and weren't going to buy it because of the Egyptian units Baffling. I don't mind the idea of not-quite historically accurate Egyptian units. It's CA's artistic license, and they can do what they wish with the game. Just because a few units aren't perfect-looking historically, does it really affect the gameplay significantly?

Just my two cents..... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif

[eds]

I'm not too keen on the whole Roman era, but I'll buy RTW anyways and hope someone makes a RTW->MTW mod, which I further hope people will play online. I'm so much more interested in the medieval era.

[CrackedAxe]

Quote[/b] ]and weren't going to buy it because of the Egyptian units Baffling

I know, crazy. I certainly would'nt deny myself what I'm sure will be a first class game over such a minor point. Still, each to their own i suppose.

[Gregoshi]

The thing that has the historical faction up in arms the most is that there seems to be little reason for the fictional units. In most cases, there are legitimate historical units that could be used. Instead, it appears that the game is favouring the cool factor over history and Hollywood stereotype costuming over actual dress. Think of the first as shield-surfing Legolas in the Lord of the Rings movies vs Legolas in the books. Think of the second as a Robin Hood: Men in Tights version of history. The question they have is why make up something when reality already provides for the need?

[Inuyasha12]

Because that's what the target audience wants, a cool game that will be fun for a while, and they get to play romans wich are bad boys
There are only a small hardcore gaming comunity compared to the hundreds of people who will actually buy RTW because it looks cool.
And in the end these people have to make money to keep on going.
It suck but we have to accept it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif

Edit: take it easy on the foul language - Gregoshi

[CrackedAxe]

Because most people are not particularly aware of historical reality. Ask your average person about Egyptians during these times and they will probably describe something like the bow-weilding, chariot-riding picture of Ramesses The Great. CA are just catering to this popular conception of this period of history, which tends to all get thrown together in peoples minds.