tw vs lotr2

[AntiochusIII]

lord of the rings2 has a risk-type map/campaign, so in that regard it is similar to the total war series. but does lotr2 have the same strategic depth on the battlefield as tw series? what about the army size that can [participate in battles - less...same...more than in tw?

by LoTR2, do you mean Battle for Middle Earth 2?

If yes, I'd personally say it's a good and fun RTS, but not a Total War. Battles and the whole resource operation are guided by different fundamentals, really. TW's "what you bring is what you have" and "formations tactics are better than units and heroes" have not really been replicated here; the good old RTS formula is still the core of the game. You still build units in the map, and from the base, and things like flanking and exhaustion aren't really "there" in a TW sense, even if some are advertised as "innovations" of the game's battle system.

(It should be noted, though, that my opinion might be a little screwed based on my distinct hatred of EA and its swath of mediocre games or sequels -- as I was recently disappointed with Black&White II.)

And if you're an Iluvatar-worshipping purist, steer clear.