Do we need different starting periods?

[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.

[pyrocryo]

Marius reform should reflect the right year. Instead the 6 month per turn should be adjusted. I can't believe that even with a good road, you need approximately 4 months to go to Capua.
Instead, how about Caesar vs Pompei start? Or Rome vs Pontus campaign. Even better, how about Imperial era until the split of the Empire to connect RTW to MTW?