disapointed with rtr, you are my last hope

[bodidley]

Ignore? Nah, they get just the right amount of attention; as proper rebels, except for the few that actual did stuff important during the time period of 280 BC to 1 AD.

In that case, what did the Greek city-states do besides get conquered?

[Lord Tomyris Reloaded]

Well I think EB does it just right- historically! Their 'barbarians' are very aesthetically pleasing and will be fun to play with- they're also well researched and depicted correctly.

[King of Atlantis]

First off barbs have to be barbs.. It is hardcoded, plus the "barbarian" of the day werent as useless as you think. Their descedents managed to become the most influential force in modern time. Gaul was much more powerful at the time than the scatered city states. Infact i would like it if there were more barbs. A split between the aedui and averni would be nice and so woul illyria.

Eb is giving the barbs exactly what they deserve. If i made a ww2 mod and made sure to represent america would i be america centered?

Dont critize Eb for making the Barbarians historically accurate.

[King of Atlantis]

all im saying is your critizing a historically accurate mod for being historicall accurate.

[SaFe]

No, I'm criticizing it because I don't think it spent the available faction slots in an ideal way.

Yes, you have the right to criticize.
You seem to be focused on those mediterranian cultures, but perhaps a mod with a smaller map mainly focused on this area fits better for you.

[Little Legioner]

I think EB shall make a better solution about on your points Infernio. They are developing this mod for more than one year that makes them a specialist over RTW dynamics. I believe they make their best in the coding limits of RTW.

In the other hand i don't expect too much core improvement for BI by the CA side. They declared it several times before such as this messages. I've pickep up from two of them in FAQ section:

Q: What do you think about to do for tightening the tactical deepness of the R: TW BI besides swimmable units and night battles?

A: Many aspects of the AI for battles has been worked on since RTW was published, and we think you'll find it gives you a better game. Then again, the cynics out there would expect us to say that, but short of making this an essay there's not a lot more to say other than it ahs been worked on.

Q. Will the battle model be :Fast battles, flat grounds, high kill rates, close armies, small map(with red line-Current RTW style) or: Long battles, non-flat grounds, slow kill rates, far armies, bigger map (without red line-old TW series style).
A.The basic battle game won't change that much; this is an expansion, not a re-imagining of RTW.

[infierno]

wasnt it supposed to make battles last more? the best roman and gaul forces, (units of 80 guys) running with 65 still alive is not a great step forward

other reasons seen in their forums:

roman skins sux, all different colours

this game could be called PHALANX WARS 6.0 (too many phalanx)

heavy cavalry heavy uderpowered, specially the charge

trarri can kill, better than phalanx ,all cavalry

heavy cavalry cant kill even non-speared cheap infantry units

[bodidley]

It was the Successor States that shaped the world until they got conquered by the romans.

Aye, the Macedonian successor states, but what about those piddling little city-states?

[jerby]

well. I actually like RTR. just not in custom-battles (every faction can train every AoR unit->elephants, phalanxes, etc) so never mind online play.
the units are nice, really. but i'm still disapointed they had no Falcata's on the unit: falacata men . i'm just a sucker for those things. Also the germanians arent very nice. "framea men" as an example...Noble spearmen..another nice unit. and they have Siege:Total War in Greece
it's really a nice mod and i'm playing it until EB comes, but some things annoy me a bit.