http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ns.html?page=8
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ns.html?page=8
I pray they include morale
Printable View
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ns.html?page=8
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ns.html?page=8
I pray they include morale
Its more AOE that RTW.
still looks teh sexy though.
I am a staunch MTW fundamentalist and think only RTW will surpass its majesty. Having said that, I think the terrain details suck http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...gc-curtain.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif
Its a RTS and the team is currently tuning the 3D engine so that it can support up to 500 3D units onscreen at once
IMO it cant really be compared to RTW.
Spartan will be much more like it although it doesnt have the same fancy 3D in battles.
CBR
The difference between RTW and this may be the difference between a wolf and a sheep. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wink.gif BUT I too wish for a MAJOR competitor to the TW series. Monopoly is never healthy for the end user i.e YOU.
swoosh iv read most reviews on this game and IIRC their is morale that affects they troops liek sending a swordsman up against one of them big trools they run away.
hoep this helps
I enjoy traditional style RTS once in a while. If this one plays as good as it looks I'll have to give it a try.
Won't be in the same league as Rome, though. They would need morale and fatigue both to compete at all, not to mention the separation of strategy from tactics.