Do we need different starting periods?

[Red Harvest]

That will be an excellent expansion pack feature. It will be fun to play some weaklings in the late stage, and challenge the great Roman empire, too.

I agree.

I'm intrigued about the idea of building up the tiny Roman republic when it is just gaining traction as well. The Punic Wars "made" Rome, but the wars against the former Etruscan states, Gauls, Magna Grecia, Samnites, Lucanians, and such are fertile ground for a campaign. The nature of the Roman army of the time is speculative and it morphed from hoplite to the early Republican pre-Polybian form during this time. I'm not sure how to handle the Macedonian powerhouse on the next block with such a campaign though. That's why I've opted for calling it "post" Alexander. If the map was more limited to primarily Italy the time period could be extended back to the time of the Gaul's sack of Rome.

[Mazoch]

The marius reform might be a good point for starting a 'late' campaign. If combined with a few changes to what regions beolng to who and more buildings in cities this would allow a campaign to focus much more on the late units of the game without breaking with realism

[zhuge]

The marius reform might be a good point for starting a 'late' campaign.

According to CA, the coming patch will delay the Marius Reform to give players more time to use units like Triarii, so I believe this change will fit in well. Here's another vote to have different starting periods and to use the Reform as one of them.

Perhaps at a later period, we could keep the effectiveness of archers as they are currently. Would still like to see them toned down during an earlier period.

[Doug-Thompson]

I like this thread's idea a lot. What I really want, though, is "decline and fall" campaigns: Civil Wars, barbarian invasions, and Huns.

[Mikeus Caesar]

It would be a good idea to have more starting periods, because then you could start in a late period, when the roman empire is at it's peak, and be a much smaller faction trying to take on the might of the roman legions.

[frogbeastegg]

I was expecting a minimum of two starting points in the game; 'early' (aka the current one) and 'late' (set just as the Marian reforms kick in). I'd love to see more starting points; it gets dull having to build everything up from scratch each and every time. It was a drawback in the original Shogun release but the add-on fixed it by introducing the various starting eras and MTW picked the idea up and ran with it. I hope it doesn't take an add-on before RTW catches up, but I suspect it will.

[Red Harvest]

I like the idea of the decline and fall as well. Parthians and the like were really meant for these later periods. I liked the way MTW restricted arbalesters/crossbows, and gunpowder to specific periods, then allowed us to campaign starting with an appropriate map for that period. I would like to see more of that with RTW.

It puts CA in a difficult position trying to create a game that starts very early, but contains units spanning about six centuries with considerable evolution of weapons and armies. Campaigns tend to last less than 100 years, so in order to keep it interesting a lot of compromises are made.