Something in the Wind

[Darios]

Look at what I've found in the Steam database.....

"ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_BOIOTIAN_LEAGUE"
"ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_KORINTHOS"

Maybe my dream of seeing Massalia and Cimmeria unlocked may soon become a reality)

[Slaists]

Sounds like Greek wars 400 BC.

[Darios]

Probably something to the nature of the Macedonian Wars....that'd be a damn good time, especially as I feel that Macedonia has not gotten its moment in the Sun yet in R2.

[Akhenaton]

Could it be?...The Peloponnesian wars? That could be great, perhaps even fixed hoplites great

[Fanest]

i hope its premacedon stuff

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

uHHHH I would love that!

[Sir_Pee_Alot]

Sounds great..

Those that also mean they finally fixed the bug with hoplite formation?.

[Linke]

Philip Campaign maybe?

[Vardeus]

https://steamdb.info/app/212280/history/

Cimmeria, Pergamon, Massilia and Colchis for GC. Credit to Vastator on the official forums.

[Darios]

https://steamdb.info/app/212280/history/

Cimmeria, Pergamon, Massilia and Colchis for GC. Credit to Vastator on the official forums.

Wow, I didn't see the part about the new factions. I'm estatic!

[Linke]

I've done a bit more checking leading me to believe that were getting a new campaign dlc (wich makes some factions playable in grand campaign), and a new free lc.
The new campaign: Greek wars

• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_ATHENAI/icon: › 7b330b32cd4e63486d617881b132c279758ca3bd.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_ATHENAI/icongray: › 479ad4947877d1dc15c102b96c84650c600276c7.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_BOIOTIAN_LEAGUE/icon: › f7e320d780b18ced806b980b5eef6f7203955076.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_BOIOTIAN_LEAGUE/icongray:

This is a few new achievemnts these and the other ones shown here https://steamdb.info/app/212280/history/ are all factions that existed or were at their height around the Persian Invasion and Peleponesian wars.
Also this new campaign seems to have a _Greek prefix in much of the data, this is very similar to the other campaigns we have got _Emp for Augustus, _Gaul for Caesar in Gaul, _Pun for Hannibal at the gates and _rom for the Grand campaign. Also if this was a Alexander campaign the prefic would not be_Greek but rather _alex or _mac
The factions in the campaign seem to be
Athens
Sparta
(Since CIG and HATH both had 5 playable factions not four I would guess the last faction is Persia)
Corinth and the Boetian leauge, again based on the link above. These are all factions that were important in the Penepolesian/ Persian wars timeframe (About the third century bc)

The Marketing potential for a dlc set here is also great thanks to media like 300, this increases the likelyhood of this being true, a campaign set in Greece during Macedonian wars would have far less mainstream marketing potential.

New grand campaign content and freelc:
Also found in the steam data is new achievemnts for four other factions in the grand campaign, none of these have the _GREEK prefix wich means theyre probaly in the grand campaign. They are
Massalia, Cimmeria and Pergamon wich I am guessing are going to be playable in the grand campaign upon purchase of this new dlc as theyre all greek factions and fairly unique positions (Except Pergamon)
and also Colchis wich is a Caucasian faction, probaly a small freelc

[Darios]

I've done a bit more checking leading me to believe that were getting a new campaign dlc (wich makes some factions playable in grand campaign), and a new free lc.
The new campaign: Greek wars

• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_ATHENAI/icon: › 7b330b32cd4e63486d617881b132c279758ca3bd.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_ATHENAI/icongray: › 479ad4947877d1dc15c102b96c84650c600276c7.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_BOIOTIAN_LEAGUE/icon: › f7e320d780b18ced806b980b5eef6f7203955076.jpg
• achievements/ACHIEVEMENT_WIN_GREEK_CAMPAIGN_AS_BOIOTIAN_LEAGUE/icongray:

This is a few new achievemnts these and the other ones shown here https://steamdb.info/app/212280/history/ are all factions that existed or were at their height around the Persian Invasion and Peleponesian wars.
Also this new campaign seems to have a _Greek prefix in much of the data, this is very similar to the other campaigns we have got _Emp for Augustus, _Gaul for Caesar in Gaul, _Pun for Hannibal at the gates and _rom for the Grand campaign. Also if this was a Alexander campaign the prefic would not be_Greek but rather _alex or _mac
The factions in the campaign seem to be
Athens
Sparta
(Since CIG and HATH both had 5 playable factions not four I would guess the last faction is Persia)
Corinth and the Boetian leauge, again based on the link above. These are all factions that were important in the Penepolesian/ Persian wars timeframe (About the third century bc)

The Marketing potential for a dlc set here is also great thanks to media like 300, this increases the likelyhood of this being true, a campaign set in Greece during Macedonian wars would have far less mainstream marketing potential.

New grand campaign content and freelc:
Also found in the steam data is new achievemnts for four other factions in the grand campaign, none of these have the _GREEK prefix wich means theyre probaly in the grand campaign. They are
Massalia, Cimmeria and Pergamon wich I am guessing are going to be playable in the grand campaign upon purchase of this new dlc as theyre all greek factions and fairly unique positions (Except Pergamon)
and also Colchis wich is a Caucasian faction, probaly a small freelc

Sounds all about right except that the Persian wars did not happen during the third century BC...we'd be looking more at the Macedonian Wars as it would fit R2's timeframe. Anything involving Alexander the Great, the Peloponnesian, or Persian wars would simply be a little too early for R2.

[Linke]

Sounds all about right except that the Persian wars did not happen during the third century BC...we'd be looking more at the Macedonian Wars as it would fit R2's timeframe. Anything involving Alexander the Great, the Peloponnesian, or Persian wars would simply be a little too early for R2.

I meant both wars happened in the 5th century bc, not very sure how "centuries" work in English.
I can't see any marketing potential in the Macedonian wars, this is probaly a deciding factor in all titles released by Ca, also I dont think it would offer that much new.
An Alexander campaign would be way more viable from a marketing perspective but still a Peleponesian and Persian wars dlc seems more likely based on the reasons in my first post.
Although if it was a Philip campaign it would be very viable to have it be _Greek and to have only Greek factions.

[texoman81]

Could CA actually be making something people have asked for? Now we just have to hope the DLC will add some new feature(s) that can be integrated into the GC as well. I"m really surprised at Colchis being chosen to be made playable. Doesn't hurt anything, i think every faction should be playable, but there are many i would have put before Colchis still. I would also like more playable factions in the Greek Campaign than just Athens, Sparta, Boeotian League and Corinth.

The three additional Greek faction for the GC will be nice. I know some people think there are already too many Greek factions, but that was the reality of the times. Bosporus and Massalia make for interesting campaigns with their blend of Greek and native units.

Sounds all about right except that the Persian wars did not happen during the third century BC...we'd be looking more at the Macedonian Wars as it would fit R2's timeframe. Anything involving Alexander the Great, the Peloponnesian, or Persian wars would simply be a little too early for R2.

Who says the DLC need to be in the same century as the CG? It never has before. Punic War, Gallic Wars and Augustus were much later. Rome I has BI and Alexander. Something centered in classical Greece would be the perfect expansion for Rome II.

[jamreal18]

Excited about this!

Wanna see improved unit variety though!!!!

[Darios]

I meant both wars happened in the 5th century bc, not very sure how "centuries" work in English.
I can't see any marketing potential in the Macedonian wars, this is probaly a deciding factor in all titles released by Ca, also I dont think it would offer that much new.
An Alexander campaign would be way more viable from a marketing perspective but still a Peleponesian and Persian wars dlc seems more likely based on the reasons in my first post.
Although if it was a Philip campaign it would be very viable to have it be _Greek and to have only Greek factions.

3rd Century BC = 300-201 BC

Well, I think that the only Campaign DLC that has a name/theme that was very marketable was HatG. I bought it because I have a friend who worships the Romans and loved the Punic wars so we played it together. I bought CiG simply because I wanted to unlock the Boii for the GC. Of course, once I bought it, I fell in love with the campaign because it was very well done in my opinion so all was well. I am certain that many people would buy a Macedonian Wars campaign because they would be able to defend Greece from Roman aggression (or conquer those corrupt and lying Greeks as the Roman Republic. Those who are not interested in the war may be tempted to buy it in order to play as Massalia, Cimmeria, or Pergamon in the GC as there are a ton of people around here who has demanded these factions for over a year now. It'll make good money for CA.

Who says the DLC need to be in the same century as the CG? It never has before. Punic War, Gallic Wars and Augustus were much later. Rome I has BI and Alexander. Something centered in classical Greece would be the perfect expansion for Rome II.

I did not say that it has to be in a single century but rather within the game's time frame. Like it or not, ROME 2 is about the rise of the Roman Republic and its transformation into the Roman Empire, not about Greeks and Persians duking it out in 500 BC. Each previously released campaign has been about Rome expanding somewhere, why should that change now?

[Linke]

But really something this close to the Games period is better of as a dlc rather than a new game, Attila is still kinda unique from the main game (how much it is you can argue).
Also thanks for clarifying the centuries thing.

[texoman81]

3rd Century BC = 300-201 BC

I did not say that it has to be in a single century but rather within the game's time frame. .Like it or not, ROME 2 is about the rise of the Roman Republic and its transformation into the Roman Empire, not about Greeks and Persians duking it out in 500 BC. Each previously released campaign has been about Rome expanding somewhere, why should that change now?

Actually you did specifically state that Persian Wars should not be included because they were not in the 3rd century. Only the first Macedonian War was in the 3rd century, and it was a stalmate and did not lead to the expansion of Rome. Yes that is what Rome II is about, but its DLC can be about something else just as it has been before. Rome I had Alexander and BI, both different time and not about the rise of Rome. You can already conquer Greece as Rome in the GC. The closer to the same time the expansions are, the less unique they will be.

Classical Greece has never been represented before and there is much interest in it. Sorry but the Boetian Leauge did not exist during the time frame of the Macedonian Wars. This DLC will be classical Greece, Rome might not even be in it at all, and if it is, it will only control Rome. Rome would just be a tiny Etruscan Kingdom trying to imitate the powerful Greek city states. It would have a hoplite based army and will be a threat to no one but smaller cities in its immediate area. Classical Greece works as a DLC because the needed components are already in Rome II, we already have hoplites and the other greek units of the time, just have to remove those that game later and give us a more detailed map of the area with more Greek cities. The workshop is already full of classical Greek units, especially Spartans.

Total War games can have expansions that go forward or backwards in time. If you go forward in time it will be about the expansion of Rome because that was what was occurring historically. However if you go backwards in time, Rome will become less and less important. The scope of the expansions do not have to fall under that of the main game. Rome II is called Rome II because that is the focus of that game specifically. The focus of the DLC campaigns can be something different.
[Wow I can't believe i am defending a decision CA is making again ]

[Darios]

Actually you did specifically state that Persian Wars should not be included because they were not in the 3rd century. Yes that is what Rome II is about, but its DLC can be about something else just as it has been before. Rome I had Alexander and BI, both different time and not about the rise of Rome. The closer to the same time the expansions are, the less unique they will be. Classical Greece has never been represented before and there is much interest in it. Sorry but the Boetian Leauge did not exist during the time frame of the Macedonian Wars. This DLC will be classical Greece, Rome might not even be in it at all, and if it is, it will only control Rome. Rome would just be a tiny Etruscan Kingdom trying to imitate the powerful Greek city states. It would have a hoplite based army and will be a threat to no one but smaller cities in its immediate area.

Your logic is flawed because what we know as DLC did not exist when we were playing Rome Total War. BI and Alex were sold as separate games that did not require RTW to run. Of course many people (including myself) find Classical Greece to be very interesting but a DLC depicting the Persian Wars would require far more work than CA would probably be willing to do and I doubt if they would be willing to focus a DLC on hoplites (a feature that they clearly did not manage to properly implement into the warscape mechanics of warfare.) The Boeotians were allied with Macedon in her wars against Rome while the Korinthians kinda bounced around between supporting Macedon and the Achaean League so theoretically they would play the role of the proverbial wild card in a Macedonian War campaign. Why take the time to create 5th century hoplite units while you can simply take what's already in the game and create factions with a mainland Hellenistic theurophoroi-based roster? You have a Macedonian king who would go against Roman authority and you'd have a Roman Republic, full of confidence fresh off of defeating Hannibal, ready to impose Roman rule upon the quarreling Greeks. The campaign literally writes itself.

[=Vastator=]

Achievement icons for the greek campaign factions

Korinthos

Athenai

Sparta

Boiotian League