Will there be more of an emphasis on Imperial Rome?

[Captain Grimes]

The previous title focused mostly on Republican Rome and ended with the death of the first Emperor - but will CA go beyond this to the early empire? I know people can say there were less factions, less wars etc but there would still be a lot of military potential like the Roman invasion of Britain, civil wars, wars against new emerging barbarian tribes, wars against the Dacians, against the jews and of course against Parthia. It would be nice too to build our cities into Imperial capitals and have a late game challange.

[Sharpe]

I think a timescale of that size would be difficult. Many people want multiple turns per year and if the game is starting in 270 BC for example then by 50 BC 440 turns would have passed (based on two turns per year) Judging from past total war games, specifically Shogun 2, there are usually only two or three super-factions left, with endless cash and troops and it does turn into a grind.

I would love to be proven wrong though. Scripted emergent factions on a large scale and slower expansion would be great.

[xjlxking]

They have to make sure building take a longer time to build. This prevent the grind. Not to mention, the bigger the map, the more enemies it can fit; the more alliances, wars, routing, pillaging, exterminating, battles, and seige which will happen
During Even during the the emergence of the Roman Empire, there were still plenty of civilizations out there, though they were pale in comparison to Rome.

[badhaggis]

I really really hope there is, or failing that a DLC imperial campaign or Expansion would be great.

[Heathen Storm]

I would think that they will have an option to become an Imperialist state. I highly doubt that they would leave that out. under the right circumstances it could have happened at any point so why leave it out?

[RGA]

Short answer is: No

Longer answer is: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo xD

[Sol Invictus]

Well the Repulican Era will certainly grab the lion's share of game time and I do want there to be two turns per year at a minimum so I think we won't go too many decades into the First Century A.D.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

I sincerely hope so! How could anyone justify the un-necessity of having the Imperial Period represented in a depiction of Roman History?! It's half the bloody timeframe! If people are going to raise the issue that comparatively less territory was added to the empire after the Principate event, What about most other Total War games? the majority of factions in Empire, Medieval and Napoleon pretty much stayed geographically the same ...

[Marmz]

So long as each faction is properly fleshed-out with a full tech tree to still feel relevant going into the imperial period (a process which involves a lot of historical "what-ifs"), the longer the campaign the merrier

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

We need a separate Imperial Campaign. It WONT be in the vanilla game. It is VERY POSSIBLE to be a DLC expansion, but then Barbarian Invasion is also another likely add-on. I want to see a campaign for Imperial Rome. Barbarian Invasion. Caesarian Civil War. Gallic Campaign. That would be great.

[Captain Grimes]

I would think that they will have an option to become an Imperialist state. I highly doubt that they would leave that out. under the right circumstances it could have happened at any point so why leave it out?

My point was not that the Roman faction would have the option to become Imperial, it does in RTW, I meant that the game reflects this as well so you would have the emergent factions that I mentioned, the change in building style as well as army - like you reach the limit of what a Republican tech tree can give you and suddenly you have this whole new layer where you can upgrade existing buildings into an Imperial splendour, and the cost of these would be so huge that you would have to be an Imperial power to afford them but the benefits would be great, then you have a new problem of upgrading your buildings whilst still defending your borders - you'd have to plan your budget well and an unexpected invasion could really effect you if your money is tied up in building, in keeping your empire together as well as defending it from external threats - just like it was then

Id like to see DLC focusing on specific campagins or periods such as the crisis of the 3rd century, the rise of Sassanid Persia, the civil war - perhaps a selection of civil war campagins from Sulla to the year of the four Emperors

[Heathen Storm]

Why are people so concerned with everything being the exact date in history? This is the total war series, all about making your own history. Why would an Imperial revolution HAVE to happen at a certain date? Under the same circumstances they could have done it at ANY point.

[LestaT]

Multiple start dates is the solution.

[Xerrop]

The previous title focused mostly on Republican Rome and ended with the death of the first Emperor - but will CA go beyond this to the early empire? I know people can say there were less factions, less wars etc but there would still be a lot of military potential like the Roman invasion of Britain, civil wars, wars against new emerging barbarian tribes, wars against the Dacians, against the jews and of course against Parthia. It would be nice too to build our cities into Imperial capitals and have a late game challange.

But all those things can happen also 100 BC during your campaigns. For a historical scenario dealing with all those events you need a new game starting in 50bc short before the decisive Civil Wars or even later during Augustus' reign.

[Yayattasa]

LOTS of emergent factions can prevent that. This way the whole thing could extend to the fall of Rome.

[Alkarin]

Multiple start dates is the solution.

This...this solves everything.

[badhaggis]

LOTS of emergent factions can prevent that. This way the whole thing could extend to the fall of Rome.

I'd prefer barbarian invasion 2, as it would get a bit more effort from CA.

[magpie]

Hmm, Its always been a slight bone of contention between player,s of TW. Given CA base the series on periods in History.
With an open ended campaign game which does not restrict the development of alternative non historical outcomes one is inclined to see some odd results crop up.
In a way its better to be ignorant of real history when it comes to fully enjoying a campaign game of this type.?
For those of us who are into real history and how it played out this can be difficult to swallow so some compromise in our thinking must come into play.
Hence I would suggest that the historical minded player tries to tailor his game play with some personal in house game rules to try to steer the campaign in a direction that they can be happy with.

Now regarding Republican/Imperial Rome I would like to see the campaign to at least cover the 1st century AD.
From there CA could I think introduce an indepth follow on game expansion to cover Imperial Rome at its peak and the Rise of the Barbarian challange and Rome,s Possible fall.
As It would follow alternative history based on a real time period The East/West divide could happen or maybe the player could save the Roman empire?

[Huberto]

The crisis of the 3rd Century AD would make for an amazing single player experience.