Unlocking factions by conquering them?

[econ21]

Just read at the legiontotalwar.com that a CA person revealed that in order to play a faction you must have first conquered it in an earlier campaign. I had heard you must be Romans first, but not this.

Like the earlier restriction, it's a bit irritating. I don't think I've ever fought a TW campaign to the bitter end, except when part of a PBM - it gets a little dull once you are clearly going to win. I guess some clever person will post a savegame or something that will unlock all factions (essential for when re-installing the game after some time away).

But in the short run, I imagine my first Roman campaign is going to be an epic - trying to conquer all factions Although I still don't like the restriction, it does sound rather fun.

[Aelwyn]

I kinda of like that. Then I will really have some focus, trying to conquer the faction I want to play first, then just trying to win so I can play that faction.

[Orda Khan]

I had intended to try a campaign but not as the Romans. My plan was to defeat Rome's Empire not expand it so the whole unlocking business means that unless some 'cheat' is available I will probably play MP only. For the life of me I can't understand this idea

.....Orda

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

I hope the minor/major thing can be easily done as in Medieval http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif

[rasoforos]

I thik that a 'genious' down there at CA needs to be fired ASAP. He played too many console games....
As you guys said hopefully a savegame or a cheat will exist to eliminate the 'unlockable' the 'magic mushrooms' and all other nonsence.
In any case it will be weeks after the launch of RTW that the game we all have been expecting will be released...the moded non-gamecube version that is...

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

[Steppe Merc]

I would have never played as the Romans... Oh well. I've never actually finished a game on MTW, so I'll just have to drudge it out so I can play as the good factions.

[Nelson]

Why would anyone not want to play every faction? I don't get it. I can understand people's disappointment in having to do anything they would rather not do but to say "I would never play the Romans" in Rome-Total War sounds curious to say the least. The Romans will have to to deal with the Senate and I expect that will make playing then very different from the other factions thus adding to the replay value of the game.

Perhaps some people expect the Romans to easily overpower the other factions and would rather not take the perceived easy route to victory. It may not be so. The Romans might be quite challenging. They did lose a lot of battles after all. Rome didn't waltz to her empire.

[rasoforos]

Its not like that for me. I just think that Rome is a very known faction and i would prefer to play as a faction i dont know much about. I would also like to play the Greek factions before the Romans as well...call it patriotic attraction ro something http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif .
This gives rise to 2 annoying features:
a) i will have to 'unlock' them liek i m playing gamecube or something
b) With the current level of accuracy i d better try NOT to learn anything through the game....

[The_Emperor]

Well I guess that decides what froman faction you play first. Do you want to play as the carthies or Barbarians or greeks first? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Monk]

Quote[/b] (The Blind King of Bohemia @ July 07 2004,14:57)]I hope the minor/major thing can be easily done as in Medieval http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif
That sums up my opinion on this matter http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-book2.gif

let's hope it's very easy to mod rtw faction wise. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-dizzy2.gif

[Steppe Merc]

The reason why I wouldn't want to play the Romans is because I have an extreme dislike of any faction that focuses on infantry, which the Romans have almost exlusivly. Besides, they just aren't as intresting to me as the Parthians, Sarmatians, Gauls, etc.

[Basileus]

im preety sure we will be able to mod the factions, like in mtw..i hope so anyway

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Well, it looks like I'll be on the warpath on easy mode. Seriously though, who thinks of this stuff??? Does the Grinch work for CA???

Grumble grumble grumble... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasarno.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasarno.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-disappointed.gif

[IrishMike]

I hope its not where u have to unlock each faction on each difficulty level seperatly.

[Longshanks]

How does this unlocking work exactly?

Does the game require you to conquer a faction's provinces, or the faction itself?

I ask this because there is a good chance AI factions will destroy each other, eliminating your chances of unlocking the destroyed faction. I imagine while you are busy expanding the Empire the other two rival Roman factions will be doing the same. Does that mean you will need three or more complete games to unlock every faction?

[The Wizard]

I don't mind having to play the Romans regarding the faction itself - all factions in the game interest me.

However, what I despise and lament is that fact that you have to play the Romans first. Why? I'd like to play Rome Total War, not Colin McRae Rally 04, thank you very much.

However, it does sound more interesting than "To unlock playable factions, complete campaign". It will force you not to sit back, tech up, and then conquer Rome and stay there for 20 turns fighting SPQR and the other factions.

Also, here's hoping that conquering the Sarmatians will make the Sarmatians playable, conquering the Greek City-states will make the Greek City-states playable, etc... In other words, conquering a faction that was previously viewed as 'non-playable' will hopefully unlock it.



~Wiz

[Leet Eriksson]

Hmm conquering the spartans....make spartans playable in MP,then crank out 20 units of spartan hoplites....I smell the warrior monk/barney rush method from previous games....

Well anyways,i'll certainly have more fun playing as romans,they seem to have a pretty nice selection of units,also additional gameplay elements and accessability of conquering whatever region you want,depending on wich roman faction you'll play.

Anyways,speaking of unlocking factions,i don't think you'll have to finish the game to unlock a faction,i'm guessing you just need to conquer them and they would be unlocked.

[alman9898]

the Spartans aren't a faction... it's called the Greek Cities faction and it includes Athens, Sparta, Pergamum, etc.

[Sjakihata]

It does remind me of bad arcade racing games indeed, however, if it is true what Wiz says, then I guess it is all right.

[Leet Eriksson]

Quote[/b] (alman9898 @ July 07 2004,20:25)]the Spartans aren't a faction... it's called the Greek Cities faction and it includes Athens, Sparta, Pergamum, etc.
i thought they would be a seperate faction,or a rebel city...anyways..thanks for clearing that up.

[Maedhros]

At one Point I think Sparta was a rebel faction. If that was the case they may have bowed to inevitable pressure, or possibly the reality that Sparta is bound to have many fans.

We should all protest the unlockable faction element of the the game. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasarno.gif It takes the game in the direction of becoming a mission based game.

I want free and total control. Mission based games are not in my mind strategy.

[Mablung]

Damnit, how screwed is that??
What benefit is there? None methinks. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasarno.gif

[King Edward]

Its a little frustraiting that we will be so limited in our choice to start with but i would have ended up as romans to start anyway so its not the end of the world for me.

Having said that, I dont really see the point in having to unlock factions, just doesnt make sense in a game of this style. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ceasarno.gif

[CBR]

How "balanced" will the other factions be?

Afterall its Rome: Total War so I dont expect all factions to have even a remote chance of winning.

The unlocking of other factions seems to be a good hint from CA: This game is focused on Rome and the other factions are just really something extra if/when you are tired of the Roman factions.


CBR

[econ21]

I am sure all factions will be winnable. Players beat MTW as Aragon, Sicily etc with little trouble. Remember, Rome is four factions so that should reduce a potential "Hojo horde" problem.

At the level of units, I have always suspected the Greek and Carthaginian unit types might have an edge over the Romans. But I don't really think balance is an issue for SP - I'd prefer there to be some "hard" and some "easy" factions for differing challenges. Especially if balance is created by going against history.

[Orda Khan]

I share Steppe Merc's feelings about the Romans and their Imperialistic infantry based armies.

This is just SP Campaign right?

......Orda

[Steppe Merc]

Just because the picture on Medival Total war was a knight, doesn't mean that the non- Catholic factions weren't winnable. In fact, a lot were far more fun. And just because it was called Viking invasion, doesn't mean that the rest of the factions weren't winnable. Whatever CA's intentions, or so called superiority of Rome, I'll still crush Rome beneath the hooves of my eastern horsemen.

[The Wizard]

Regardless, RTW will be a fun game. Albeit a bit historically marred. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/shogunshame.gif



~Wiz

[Puzz3D]

I find the first time play the most interesting because the AI is unpredictable to you. Once you've played a while, you can never recreate that first time experience. The game devolves into one of exploiting the AI's predictability. If you are someone who doesn't want to play as Rome as your first experience with the game, then you are out of luck. There may well be a command line argument which opens up the game to more player control of features as the -ian does for MTW.

[The Wizard]

I heartily agree, Yuuki. I remember my first campaign in MTW and STW and they were great, especially the moment that Golden Horde turned up.

That's the problem with having to play the Romans first. It limits your freedom in choosing your favorite historical people (i.e. irl) to have that first experience with. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/flat.gif



~Wiz

[econ21]

Puzz3D (or anyone else) - can you remind me what -ian does?
Cheers
Simon

[Basileus]

Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ July 08 2004,16:28)]Puzz3D (or anyone else) - can you remind me what -ian does?
Cheers
Simon
well one thing it does is no camera restrictions you can zoom way up and move diffrently with your mouse, if i remember corectly heh

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

You can change factions in the stategic map, automate the AI to play the game alone, etc...

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (Orda Khan @ July 07 2004,14:54)]I had intended to try a campaign but not as the Romans. My plan was to defeat Rome's Empire not expand it so the whole unlocking business means that unless some 'cheat' is available I will probably play MP only. For the life of me I can't understand this idea

.....Orda
Just do it in one game. Take the role of a Roman general and do what they couldnt...take over the world :)

One mass game like that wouldnt hurt ya :)

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (Puzz3D @ July 08 2004,17:15)]I find the first time play the most interesting because the AI is unpredictable to you. Once you've played a while, you can never recreate that first time experience. The game devolves into one of exploiting the AI's predictability. If you are someone who doesn't want to play as Rome as your first experience with the game, then you are out of luck. There may well be a command line argument which opens up the game to more player control of features as the -ian does for MTW.
I dont think this game will be like that only becasue all the factions act different. Once you get ahold of one u have to learn a new factions "moves" but may forget some of the other factions and boom they get you. Plus it seems generals will play a bigger role so its not just the faction u need to grow acustume to but yes i do agree about the first itme experience being the absoulte best.

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Steppe Merc @ July 08 2004,22:31)]Just because the picture on Medival Total war was a knight, doesn't mean that the non- Catholic factions weren't winnable. In fact, a lot were far more fun. And just because it was called Viking invasion, doesn't mean that the rest of the factions weren't winnable. Whatever CA's intentions, or so called superiority of Rome, I'll still crush Rome beneath the hooves of my eastern horsemen.
Its not just the name of Rome: Total war. The special thing about unlocking factions and how the game has been promoted is another thing.

In most (if not all videos) I have downloaded I always see Roman units in the battles. When we see the campaign map its always someone playing as Rome. When elephants or a phalanx comes charging its against some Roman units.

Rome has 3 playable factions plus the Senate. There seem to be ingame videos of events (speech in Roman senate and other things IIRC) that makes it look like this game has lots of details for that faction. As I see it RTW will have what was lacking in MTW compared to STW but we have so far only seen it for the Roman factions.

Yes some of the other faction might be strong enough to win with, but as far as I can see they wont come near the Roman factions when it comes to gameplay and historical feel/immersion.

To me the unlocking of factions says a lot really. CA wants the players to focus on Rome and the rest are just detailed "non-player" factions who wont give the same game experience compared to playing as a Roman faction.


CBR

[The Wizard]

Yes, looking at it that is an assumption that is easy to make, and a lot of things point to it.

If so, it's a huge pity... but we'll have to wait and see.



~Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-no.gif

[scooter_the_shooter]

well i will use cheats my first cmapaing to get it done quick

[econ21]

Maybe Rome will be rather like the Catholics in MTW - they are a little more interesting because they have to cope with the Senate/Pope http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif and they tend to have more fun GAs (crusades). I suspect and hope these aspects are more developed in RTW than MTW, although I admit these improvements may be mostly for the Romans.

However, I suspect the non-Roman factions will be great fun just as the Byzantines, Turks etc can be in MTW. The range of units some have - especially the Carthaginians and Greek types - makes me, as someone with a pro-Roman tilt, drool.

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Simon Appleton @ July 09 2004,15:26)]However, I suspect the non-Roman factions will be great fun just as the Byzantines, Turks etc can be in MTW.
A majority of the factions in MTW historically had their ups and downs and could have turned into major powers.

MTW might not have had the same feel as STW but lots of "balanced" factions are not that unrealistic.

If people want a good historical feel and realism I dont see how some disunited Briton, German or Gallic tribes should have any chance of taking over whole of Europe.

The only long conflict that Romans fought was the Punic wars and that was more a question of Roman will as they sure had the resources to win in the end.

As I see it CA has given RTW a very good feel in this specific period: the expansion of Rome. Instead of MTW's many factions they focus on Rome to make the gaming experience as deep as possible. We can only wait and see how good it really is but so far its looking pretty good.

I didnt buy MTW for the Campaign but for MP, but as it is now I think I will enjoy RTW SP a lot more than in MTW.

If people expect same kind of depth for all factions.. well thats just unrealistic expectations.

In STW we only had one culture with a good historical feel and RTW does seem to go back to that and now you even have loads of different enemy cultures/factions to conquer, as well as a potiential civil war, trying to gain the ultimate goal: Emperor of Rome.

RTW seem to combine history and gameplay nicely. Some obscure barbarian tribe cant win the game and lots of gameplay and depth for the faction that actually can win.

So you guys better start learning some Latin.

Roma Victor


CBR

[Puzz3D]

CBR,

The Roman empire was conquered, and I believe it was by disunited tribes of barbarians at which point Western Europe entered the Dark Ages. Now they didn't end the game before 450 AD did they? If factions other than Rome can't win the game, why would they be playable at all?

[CBR]

RTW is supposed to end just around uhm AD 10 or something.

The reasons behind the fall of Rome is not easy to explain with just a few words heh. But the situation was very different compared to the republican period 500 years before. Rome itself was weaker because of internal problems and was under much more pressure from its neighbours. Some of these german tribes were also stronger and more united.

RTW 200 BC and RTW AD 400 would be 2 different games even if the map and faction names were the same.

Edit: Im not saying other factions cant win the game. I dont know the diplomatic options other factions have against a Rome that has 3 factions.

Powers like Carthage might be able to defeat Rome in the early stages or you might be able to build up a large Parthian or Seleucid empire before you get in real contact with Rome.

All Im saying is that everything points towards a game that is focused on Rome. Playing other factions wont be as detailed and deep experiences but maybe you can win with them I dont know (depends on difficulty too). Several factions are playable but only after this unlocking feature..why is that?


CBR

[Orda Khan]

Barbarians

This is a word used to describe the peoples outside of Rome's grasp and is a derogatory term. Since it is the accounts of Rome that have been studied, history has been very one sided. The Vandals, a semi nomadic race who were cultured and made exquisite gold jewelry. The Goths, sedentary people who built magnificent structures. Even the Huns who had displaced these tribes were far more cultured than Rome gives them credit. Graves have been found in areas of the Eastern Roman Empire that contained remains that were distinctly Hunnic in appearance, the domed skull which was brought about by the custom of head binding of infants. DNA tests proved that the remains were of indigenous people and not Huns. The people of this area were influenced more by the Huns than the Romans. The Romans even adopted the same bow as that used by the these barbarians.

What would have happened at Chalons if the Vandals had not sold out Attila?

Yet again we see the inaccuracy that one sided slurs nurture over the years. The 'Dark' Ages were only called that because Rome was finally crushed and the people who did that did not grunt and sling heads

.....Orda

[The Wizard]

If I recall correctly, a certain 'Father of History' once wrote that if a certain group of 'disunited tribes' in a certain area called Thrake would have conquered the world if only they would stop fighting each other and would unite.

So if the Thracians could conquer the world according to Herodotus, why couldn't the Gauls and the Germanic peoples? Caesar certainly did not want a unified Gaul facing him and raced to bring down the Gauls tribe by tribe before they could unite and fight him as one nation rather than various tribes. Same goes for the Germanic peoples. Dacia was quite a powerful state under Burebista, who unified the Dacian tribes.

Macedonia was a disunified and weak land of hill tribes which Philip united and turned into the greatest army the world had seen.

So if RTW presents us with weak starting positions for the barbarians, who says that we could not do the same as Burebista and Philip and turn disunified barbarians into worldly empires?



~Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Steppe Merc]

Here here Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif

[Lord Aeon]

Quote[/b] (Steppe Merc @ July 09 2004,16:34)]Here here Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif
LOL, man, that never gets old http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif (no sarcasm intended)

Anyway, i don't see how unlockable factions should have a distinct bearing one way or another on lasting enjoyment of the game.

"OH NOES11 I HAVE TO PLAY ROME TOTAL WAR FOR A LONG TIME TO GET TEH FACTION I WANT11"

Yeah, that sounds like a problem. Playing the greatest strategy game since chess would definitely suck. I certainly don't wanna do that to unlock *my* favorite faction. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I agree with the perspective that the "Barbarians", and any other RTW faction for that matter, should have a realistic possibility of dealing with Rome and turn into an Empire. It would be Historically accurate. The fact that it didn't happen in History, doesn't invalidate that possibility. Historical events sometimes depend of certain circunstances that have nothing to do with aparent civilizational or military superiority.

[The Wizard]

Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 09 2004,22:55)]
Quote[/b] (Steppe Merc @ July 09 2004,16:34)]Here here Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif
LOL, man, that never gets old http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif (no sarcasm intended)

Anyway, i don't see how unlockable factions should have a distinct bearing one way or another on lasting enjoyment of the game.

"OH NOES11 I HAVE TO PLAY ROME TOTAL WAR FOR A LONG TIME TO GET TEH FACTION I WANT11"

Yeah, that sounds like a problem. Playing the greatest strategy game since chess would definitely suck. I certainly don't wanna do that to unlock *my* favorite faction. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
Your attempted criticism towards our scepticism of RTW has very quickly devolved into blatant fanboyism of CA.

It's absolutely not worth it arguing with you, you provide no arguments and to top that, you also turn our arguments into idiotic sentences written in fuckwit for no apparent reason.

If you really want to take on a role of supporter of CA, stop this mindless mud throwing and make a comment that's worth having an argument over.



~Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ July 09 2004,17:56)]
Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 09 2004,22:55)]
Quote[/b] (Steppe Merc @ July 09 2004,16:34)]Here here Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/medievalcheers.gif
LOL, man, that never gets old http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif (no sarcasm intended)

Anyway, i don't see how unlockable factions should have a distinct bearing one way or another on lasting enjoyment of the game.

"OH NOES11 I HAVE TO PLAY ROME TOTAL WAR FOR A LONG TIME TO GET TEH FACTION I WANT11"

Yeah, that sounds like a problem. Playing the greatest strategy game since chess would definitely suck. I certainly don't wanna do that to unlock *my* favorite faction. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
Your attempted criticism towards our scepticism of RTW has very quickly devolved into blatant fanboyism of CA.

It's absolutely not worth it arguing with you, you provide no arguments and to top that, you also turn our arguments into idiotic sentences written in fuckwit for no apparent reason.

If you really want to take on a role of supporter of CA, stop this mindless mud throwing and make a comment that's worth having an argument over.



~Wiz http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
Don't loose your time with Lord Aeon, Wiz Someone only capable of producing ignorant bigot comments, does not make it worth paying attention to... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-rolleyes.gif

[Lord Aeon]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ July 09 2004,17:56)]

Quote[/b] ]Your attempted criticism towards our scepticism of RTW has very quickly devolved into blatant fanboyism of CA.

Sue me.


Quote[/b] ]It's absolutely not worth it arguing with you

It's not my intention to argue with you, Aristotle. It's *YOU* following behind everything *I* post, not the other way around. Get it right.


Quote[/b] ]you provide no arguments

Wrong again. I should have known better, however, that i need to spell everything out for the logically-impaired.

So here's my argument (again): Some of you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Unlocking factions should not be a chore in this game because the game itself is so good. Something that is fun to do ostensibly ceases to become a chore for someone who has the perspective to understand that he or she is doing something fun in the first place. It *is* a chore for those short-sighted individuals that can't see the forest for the trees, as it were. It also follows that just because something has a goal does not make it evil or unfun; that's the attitude that adolescents take to anything with guidelinges. Refusing to play the SP portion at all for this reason is silly, spiteful and visionless.

Is that any more clear?


Quote[/b] ]you also turn our arguments into idiotic sentences written in fuckwit

Not a difficult thing to do, my friend. Not difficult at all.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 09 2004,20:59)]It's not my intention to argue with you, Aristotle.



So here's my argument
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif you say you dont wanna argue but then you say here is my argument. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

[Lord Aeon]

I dunno. I don't equate defending myself from a personal attack with starting an argument with another individual. But maybe that's not how it works here. BTW, "argue" and "argument" here are used with slightly different connotations. I'll leave it to you to figure out what those might be.

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 09 2004,22:30)]I dunno. I don't equate defending myself from a personal attack with starting an argument with another individual. But maybe that's not how it works here. BTW, "argue" and "argument" here are used with slightly different connotations. I'll leave it to you to figure out what those might be.
I got what you meant but your attitude is just like...bad, even ur closing statement, comment w/e it was here u said "oh I leave it to u to figure it out" what are u implying we are dumb or suttin?

ur argument may have been valid but they way u went about it was irrogent.

[alman9898]

I think the faction-unlock feature is dumb because I never finish campaigns as it is. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-help.gif

[Lord Aeon]

Quote[/b] (MiniKiller @ July 09 2004,21:55)]ur argument may have been valid but they way u went about it was irrogent.
That's probably true. I didn't know people were taking such offense at my tone... But now that i know, you wanna know how i feel about it? I don't feel the least bit bad about it.

Like i said before, level-headedness and temperance has been out the window for a long time on this forum. I'm just on the other side of the fence, ridiculing these mole-blind moaners instead of ridiculing Creative Assembly, the people bringing us the game. So if that makes me the bad guy in this place, so be it.

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 09 2004,23:26)]
Quote[/b] (MiniKiller @ July 09 2004,21:55)]ur argument may have been valid but they way u went about it was irrogent.
That's probably true. I didn't know people were taking such offense at my tone... But now that i know, you wanna know how i feel about it? I don't feel the least bit bad about it.

Like i said before, level-headedness and temperance has been out the window for a long time on this forum. I'm just on the other side of the fence, ridiculing these mole-blind moaners instead of ridiculing Creative Assembly, the people bringing us the game. So if that makes me the bad guy in this place, so be it.
I understand where you are coming from and am glad you can at least see that you may have offeneded others but you say that level-headedness and temperance has gone out the window...well arent you keeping it out? Why not be that cool level-headed person and try to bring this place back instead of giving up and saying "its already gone" and then act without temperance?

[Lord Aeon]

You're right again, and i'll try to be more... mindful of people's sensibilities. Understand, though, that i reserve the right to call some of these knuckleheads on their BS when it's necessary. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

OK, i probably didn't need that final sentence. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-oops.gif That's the last time. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (Lord Aeon @ July 10 2004,00:08)]You're right again, and i'll try to be more... mindful of people's sensibilities. Understand, though, that i reserve the right to call some of these knuckleheads on their BS when it's necessary. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

OK, i probably didn't need that final sentence. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-oops.gif That's the last time. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
Thanks m8

Yes I do understand that sometimes words will be said...or keyed rather and if I'm not mistaken I just read a post with what seems to be a sense of humor http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

[gaelic cowboy]

Hey it will be simple just use a cheat which is boud to be there get a load of florins and hey presto instant empire and units with no effort crushing the whoever in a half an hour should be doable that way then http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif no more restriction probs http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[The Wizard]

Right... now that someones apparent lack of attention has been cleared up, we can go back to the subject of this thread.



~Wiz

[Leet Eriksson]

I just hope you can unlock factions without finishing the campaign,or probably unlock them through historical battles,mini-campaigns and such it might work...anyways i hope its like this,you conquer a faction and a message pops up saying its unlocked,its pretty simple.

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ July 10 2004,13:46)]Right... now that someones apparent lack of attention has been cleared up, we can go back to the subject of this thread.



~Wiz
Come on wiz that was uncalled for.

It's been squashed so no need for that jab. It could just lead to another agrument or worse a flame war. Let's just all calm and breath and then talk sensiblly.

[MadKow]

Have to play Rome first? Thats fine by me.
I already made up my mind i am going to buy and play this game.
They probably are forcing this on the players because the FULL Rome Total War experience implies playing the Romans with their Senate and political intrigues. So it makes sense to me.

Some said "I'll just play Multi-player, then". That sums it up to me: i only play single player. To me Total War is the full experience, the grand scale strategy and the micromanagement of Horse Archers, all in one great fun package.

[ah_dut]

in MTW, has Tosa not unlocked the historical battles and campaigns? He or barroca or somebody should be able to unlock these files http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif trust people http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ July 09 2004,23:29)]If I recall correctly, a certain 'Father of History' once wrote that if a certain group of 'disunited tribes' in a certain area called Thrake would have conquered the world if only they would stop fighting each other and would unite.
Sure and AFAIK he also wrote about how the Egyptians considered wool to be unclean while archaeological evidence shows it was widely used in burials. His description of the Scythians also does not fit at all with what we know today.


Quote[/b] ]So if the Thracians could conquer the world according to Herodotus, why couldn't the Gauls and the Germanic peoples? Caesar certainly did not want a unified Gaul facing him

Caesar fought with limited resources and "barbarian" societies normally only united when invaded.

I dont know how RTW will be but I guess you start as a leader of united Gaul or Germanic tribes which hardly can be considered historical. Some people want as historical tribal units as possible but they dont want the tribal society that goes hand in hand with such units.

Dacia was a powerful regional power but was really just a threat to Roman interests in that region and not a threat to Rome itself.


Quote[/b] ]Macedonia was a disunified and weak land of hill tribes which Philip united and turned into the greatest army the world had seen.


And Philip created a military system that would dominate the Hellenic world for the next few centuries. But in RTW you wont be able to create any new military units for the barbarian tribes. You are left with the typical (stereotype?) tribal units with no way of changing the society or culture.


Quote[/b] ]So if RTW presents us with weak starting positions for the barbarians, who says that we could not do the same as Burebista and Philip and turn disunified barbarians into worldly empires?

Well I guess RTW will allow you to do that but the gameplay wont be as deep and detailed as when playing as one of the Roman factions. It wont give me much satisfaction of doing it, but all you need to do is play and finish a campaign as the Romans (or mod the game) and then you can play the barbarian tribes all you want http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif


CBR

[biguth dickuth]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ July 11 2004,16:15)]And Philip created a military system that would dominate the Hellenic world for the next few centuries. But in RTW you wont be able to create any new military units for the barbarian tribes. You are left with the typical (stereotype?) tribal units with no way of changing the society or culture.
Yes, but since they are giving a Civilization-esque feeling to the game's single-player campaign wouldn't it be nice if you could have diferrent political systems and recruiting methods for each faction?

For instance, Rome's republican system (an oligarchy actually) would give you a main army of militia (the legionaires) backed up by soldiers from allied/subordinated italian cities and some mercenaries, during the pre-marian times.
For the Parthians it would be diferrent as their "feudal" monarchy would give the king the ability to call his nobles to arms and they would come with a few heavily armoured horsemen and masses of lightly armoured horse-archers. But when the king would be away from his main lands for a long time, there should be an increased chance of revolt by unsatisfied nobles...

If anyone has ever played Europa Universalis 2, he/she will know that some main social and economical factors are included in the game and the player is given the ability to change them, thus leading to a slow and gradual transformation of his faction's society.
A feature like that could also be included in the totalwar series. As the Parthians, you could, for example, choose to change this despotic feudal monarchy into an oligarchy based on central state power. The full transformation could take years to happen but you will gradually see changes in troop types, troop quality and availability, in population loyalty, in commanders' loyalty, in amounts of money earned, in avalailable technology etc.

I know that my post is quite off-topic but it was triggered by the quoted comment. It's more like wishful thinking because despite it's adding to the "deepness" of the gameplay, there is little chance it will be included in this or a future totalwar game.

[biguth dickuth]

Regarding the unlocking of factions i have always prefered to have as much liberty of choice as possible. Therefore, i am not happy with this feature.

It is not that i consider playing the game with the romans first to be a "chore" (mind you...) but it is just that i like to be able to chose for myself and not be "forced" to do something, even if playing with the romans first is something i might consider doing anyway.

I would be most happy if every faction in the game was playable and unlocked. The fact that it is named Rome TW doesn't mena that gameplay with the rest of the factions should be garbage.

[Orda Khan]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ July 09 2004,15:49)]If people want a good historical feel and realism I dont see how some disunited Briton, German or Gallic tribes should have any chance of taking over whole of Europe.
Why did I immediately think of a certain young man by the name of Temujin? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

....Orda

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Orda Khan @ July 11 2004,23:42)]Why did I immediately think of a certain young man by the name of Temujin? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

....Orda
I knew you would come up with that one Orda http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Yes the steppe nomad cultures are the ones that have been able to make quick and large conquests. Seljuks, Magyars, Huns and Mongols are all names remembered today and caused lots of fear back then

Mongols are the best example and made a large empire but it couldnt even last 200 years.

Just take Macedonia as another example. Sure they suddenly came with their fantastic Companion cavalry and Sarissa armed phalanx and defeated the Persians quickly but the empire died when Alexander died.

Large conquests are not worth much if there is no proper political structure to maintain it. A strong leader can make wonders but it takes more than that.

Mongols were big enough for an expansion for STW..in a few months we will be playing Rome: Total War http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif


CBR

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (biguth dickuth @ July 11 2004,20:12)]Yes, but since they are giving a Civilization-esque feeling to the game's single-player campaign wouldn't it be nice if you could have diferrent political systems and recruiting methods for each faction?
Well they could make it to be like Civ but it would also take a lot of work. They would have to create more units for each faction, graphics and videos for each type of way the player could go.

Games like EU or Crusader Kings have a much more generic system with no real unique feel for each faction nor advanced graphics to worry about, so its easier to make details like that.

Some of the historical feel would also not be there if cultures could change radically. What would Romans be without its Legions?


CBR

[andrewt]

However, in Total War games, you're only supposed to conquer the world, not hold it for many years after that. It also doesn't take into account the player dying and some idiot taking his place behind the keyboard and mouse, which is basically how many of these short lived empires fell.

I really don't like the idea of unlocking factions even though I'm most likely to play the Romans first. Playing in the order somebody else wants is a lot less fun than playing in the order I want. No matter how good the gameplay is, I'll always rush until I get to whomever I wish to play first.

[biguth dickuth]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ July 12 2004,21:52)]Games like EU or Crusader Kings have a much more generic system with no real unique feel for each faction nor advanced graphics to worry about, so its easier to make details like that.
Yes, you're right about that, i understand that the amount of work would be enormous if they were to give the game a historical feel with all those functions implemented, instead of having generic factions like in EU2 or Civ.
But it would be a hell of a game, wouldn't it?


Quote[/b] ]Some of the historical feel would also not be there if cultures could change radically. What would Romans be without its Legions?

Still, this isn't entirely ahistorical.
From the republican legions you could get to the imperial cavalry-focused army of Heraklios within a period of centuries.

[Orda Khan]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ July 12 2004,19:46)]Mongols are the best example and made a large empire but it couldnt even last 200 years.
It depends how you view history really, the Mongol Empire was never truly a united entity but the 'Golden Horde' was around in some shape or form for quite a while longer. It divided to form Kazan and the Great Horde and a further split brought about Astrakhan and Crimea. Kazan and Astrakhan were taken by Ivan the terrible in 1542 and 1544, Crimea defeated the Great Horde in 1502 but they were already subjugates of the Ottoman Turks. Crimea was finally annexed in 1783 by Catherine the Great.

The most worrying thing I could imagine about RTW would be the other factions reduced to 'journey men'. However if that were the case MP would require different stats

....Orda

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (andrewt @ July 12 2004,21:25)]It also doesn't take into account the player dying and some idiot taking his place behind the keyboard and mouse, which is basically how many of these short lived empires fell.
Hm but that is what we have the game? A king doesnt always get a son with good stats and that can cause problems?


CBR

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (biguth dickuth @ July 13 2004,02:21)]But it would be a hell of a game, wouldn't it?
There is not doubt it would a massive game with loads of details and lots of playing hours in it. The developers diary says that they did think of making an Ancient total war but felt it was too big and not enough focus so Rome it was.


Quote[/b] ]From the republican legions you could get to the imperial cavalry-focused army of Heraklios within a period of centuries.

Oh yes but a) it would represent a game of much larger scope than any Total War game so far and b) its still historical so it wouldnt feel so strange to end up with a Roman army like that.


CBR

[andrewt]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ July 14 2004,18:45)]
Quote[/b] (andrewt @ July 12 2004,21:25)]It also doesn't take into account the player dying and some idiot taking his place behind the keyboard and mouse, which is basically how many of these short lived empires fell.
Hm but that is what we have the game? A king doesnt always get a son with good stats and that can cause problems?


CBR
Yes, it can cause problems. However, the player who created the empire in the game is still the same player behind the keyboard and mouse. The player will have to overcome the drawback of having an heir with crappier stats. The player is still firmly in control, however.

A better analogy would be if the player gives control of the game to somebody who has never played the game before and who isn't good at playing strategy games. I'm sure that pandemonium will erupt at that point. There will be massive rebellions and civil wars and important battles lost.