What about keeping it historical?

[lars573]

From what I have read on these forums and from the screenshots I have seen it seems that the only way to play is to expand really fast and quick, otherwise you do not have a chance. The soul purpose of the campaign is to conquer 45 provinces, which seems like a large part of the known world. This is obviously made even worse by the fact that you have very large provinces and can conquer a very large area in a matter of turns.

The larger provinces are either desert or have very low population density.

So is there any interest at all for people prefering hictorical gameplay or slow expansions? I mean I want to play England and struggle against France, but not conquer half of it in a matter of turns in a rush for rebel towns. I understand that this game focuses on battles, but it seems to me that it resembles a weird boardgame rather than a historical simulator. For me a large part of the fun is in the historical accuracy and in the more or less realistic expansion of nations.

Thing is TW never was, never will be, and in fact was never designed, or intended to be a historical sim. If you want a sim from TW your expections are unreasonable. CA never set out to create historical sims, they set out to make RTS games. And they did.


Threads like these are almost as ridiculous as a person complaining that Company of Heroes is also an RTS and not a sim. When in both cases the games were marketed as RTS games.