RTW Multiplayer Rules: A Synopsis

[hellenes]

I am well aware of Europa Barbarorum, it is one of the many mods that I have tried already. Would I stake my wages on their mod being a true reflection of history? No.. and the reasons for this I have already stated in the quote you have used.
Why the appearance of some MTW units have not received the same level of criticism is beyond me. I can only put it down to the fact that MTW, as a game, was acceptable to the masses. It seems that RTW was less favourable and has therefore received ( IMO ) undue criticism.


By 'some' I presume you are talking about Hunnic Elite? Do you think Elite units should be beaten by Light Cav? Should there always be a counter unit? Maybe there is a counter tactic instead

.....Orda

Are you a Beta tester for EB?
Lucky you!!!
Ask Khelvan if their mod is a true reflection of history or not...
MTW graphics engine didnt leave much space for criticism, and MTW (compared to Rome) is MORE historically accurate.
Also MTW wasnt acceptable to the masses because before the CA turned the eyecandy on, all the current RTW fanboys were calling MTW a "notsorealtimeuglyriskcrap".
But as I said before how one can talk about:

"It's the players analytical approach to a game that is supposed to represent historical warfare that ruins MP. I have played many MP games where the approach was to field realistic armies and these were far more enjoyable than the usual"

When :

"There are too many unknown or presumed facts about history to even begin to paint a picture of what things 'actually looked like' and sources can be very one sided and biased.

How can we know how "realistic armies" were if we express doubt about historical facts and disregard them? Shouldnt we then persume that armies of dogs, pigs, screeching women and druids existed in full military use and thus use them online?
The vanilla battle of Raphia makes me wonder how far the stupidity and the bending to that stupidity can go.

Hellenes