Alexander "Hand On" Preview

[Gregoshi]

The folks at IGN.com had a chance to play a little bit with RTW: Alexander and wrote a preview article about the experience. You can read it here: http://pc.ign.com/articles/710/710220p1.html

I haven't been following the development of Alexander up until now, but the campaign game appears like it will be a different kind than we are used to. Sounds interesting.

[Lorenzo_H]

Oooooh I can't wait!

[econ21]

Thanks, Gregoshi, that link is informative - most importantly, it says the campaign lasts 100 turns and so addresses my main concern which was about the length of the campaign. The report emphasises the "blitz" nature of the campaign, but 100 turns is sufficient to motivate me. The multiple stacks I expected - they were part of what made BI fun. It would be good if they sometimes doubled up when attacking you - so they could bring their numbers to bear - but that may be too much to hope for.

[edyzmedieval]

I always said that I would buy Alexander. I am keeping my promise.
Alexander will be much more than a simple expansion pack.

[Cheexsta]

Interestingly, the game covers 12-13 years but also goes for 100 turns. Perhaps CA has lifted the hardcode on the number of turns per year? That's certainly an interesting thought. I know we can already increase (or even decrease...) the number of turns per year through scripts, but if it's un-hardcoded then it may make things much easier, especially if you're able to give each season a name.

Or maybe they just made it easier to run background scripts, such as ones enabling multiple turns per year? I'm sure a lot of modders would be happy about that...

[edyzmedieval]

Maybe we can expect a new patch?

[Barbarossa82]

I really, really hope the Persians are playable. Looking forward so much to laying the smackdown on Alexander!

[Lorenzo_H]

I really, really hope the Persians are playable. Looking forward so much to laying the smackdown on Alexander!

They will be, or rather, better be because thats exactly what I'm gonna do!

[Viking]

100 turns?

Ah well, I guess they've managed to balance it. Perhaps we will se a recruitment system aka M:TW2.

[Puzz3D]

IGN preview: "forget about the years, the game is all about turns now even if the meta-map still looks like the seasons are turning."

This is just wonderful. So, there are 100 turns each representing 6 months between 336 BC and 323 BC.

IGN: "The headlong rush into enemy territory doesn't leave much chance to build up an economy which is especially troubling since the game begins while Macedonia is still recovering from the shellacking the Persians laid down a century earlier. At the same time, it's nearly impossible to leave troops behind in any conquered cities to quell riots and keep insurgents down."

You have 100 turns to conquer 30 provinces and 10 cities. On your mark. Get ready. Go!

[The Spartan (Returns)]

looks quite fun!

[GeneralHankerchief]

Still debating on whether to shell out the money or not. The campaign sounds exciting, but isn't enough. I think it'll all come down whether the other factions are playable or not.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

read this:

a gamespot review.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...&mode=previews

it seems you wont be able to play non-greek factions.

[Lorenzo_H]

Ahhh well, thats just stupid. Maybe they will be unlackable? Mayeb we could edit the files?

[Barbarossa82]

I think I'm starting to see that they've conceived the Alexander expansion differently to the way I'd hoped. I had hoped they would basically set out the world as it was at the beginning of Alexander's reign, then give you the opportunity to put into practice what you would do if you were Alexander or Darius. Now it's looking like the aim of the game is to simply replicate Alexander's career as a computer simulation. You must go where he went, when he went there, with what he took there, and end it by the time he died. So basically it's a heavily scripted role-playing game rather than the more conventional Total War recipe of an accurate (for the most part) starting position, followed by a free rein.

I'm not bashing CA, for the record. (a) because the game isn't out yet so this could be a false impression, and (b) because they have a right to design it however they want. I'll just be disappointed if it turns out to be what I think it's going to be.

[econ21]

Well, we'll soon see. I am not sure the core campaign will be heavily scripted - it would certainly be an innovation if it were. (It should not be confused with the linked battles that Brian Blessed has done the voice work for.)

But I think the map and victory conditions will dictate that the only way for Alexander to go is east. Rather like how the Vikings in Viking Invasion could only go to the UK. Beyond that, I expect the Macedonian player will have all the freedom you normally enjoy in a TW campaign. As I say, I normally dislike blitz games - I'm a turtle - but this is one where doing a blitz is entirely historical and doing as well as the historical outcome could be a good challenge in a game. Rather like replicating the fall of France in 1940 in a wargame.

Not sure about other factions not being playable. If true, it would be disappointing although I suspect they - at least the Persians - might play out rather like the Japanese in Mongol Invasion. Some horrendous battles to begin with and then, if you are successful, it's game over in a few turns. Not a very interesting strategic situation.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Hmm, very good point Econ21. I suppose that would be too short of campaign. And last time I checked, Greek/Indian units didn't horde, like in BI. Oh well...