What do you Think....

[theprof739]

IF and I stressed IF, CA made a Rome II: Total War and it included naval battles (as seen in Empires), more unit individuality as seen in M2TW, the "somewhat" improved Diplomacy, and all the other fancy new features CA has developed, would you like to see Rome 2: Total Realism? All the great improvements of CA plus the monumental achievements of the RTR team.

-Do you think the RTR VII team would be involved or do the get their well deserved rest?

-What features, factions, and units would you like to see?

-What would the map be? the Timeline?

:hmmm: Lets hear your opinions




Ah.... what it is to deam!

[Brusilov]

Yes on both counts. A R2:TW and a RTR mod on top of that.

I would hope that when RTR VII is released it will keep gamers happy for a long time to come.

[Tony83]

While I think it's almost inevitable that CA will produce a Rome follow-up, probably based on the Empire engine, I very much doubt that they will ever make a product that won't benefit from the attention of teams such as RTR, EB, RS etc. Such a game would just not be universally marketable.

CA will always be obliged to adopt a slightly "Hollywoodish" approach to historical accuracy, to ensure maximum appeal to the maximum number of players. And, to be honest, I don't think it really matters, due to the symbiotic relationship that seemingly exists between CA's basic product and the modding teams.

CA produce a cracking generic game, which the modders then fine tune to suit their particular tastes. It was, and will ever be. thus.

I just hope they sort out some of the wishy washy troop movements of Med II before their next game.

[Solaris]

While I think it's almost inevitable that CA will produce a Rome follow-up, probably based on the Empire engine, I very much doubt that they will ever make a product that won't benefit from the attention of teams such as RTR, EB, RS etc. Such a game would just not be universally marketable.

CA will always be obliged to adopt a slightly "Hollywoodish" approach to historical accuracy, to ensure maximum appeal to the maximum number of players. And, to be honest, I don't think it really matters, due to the symbiotic relationship that seemingly exists between CA's basic product and the modding teams.

CA produce a cracking generic game, which the modders then fine tune to suit their particular tastes. It was, and will ever be. thus.

I just hope they sort out some of the wishy washy troop movements of Med II before their next game.

Good post! Let's just see what Empire is like. Mind you, I haven't even bothered with MII:TW.

[magpie]

Good thread, I am looking forward to seeing CA produce a Rome 2, based on a new engine, opening up a lot more possibilties for all the dedicated modder's in these forums. My personal hope and dream is they marry RTW with Barbarian invasion to produce a super RTW 2. The time span would let us cover the entire history of Rome, From its Rise to its Fall, What a challange. regards magpie.

[lemons]

Of all the threads ive read this is the best question ive seen posted. My answer, HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Timeframe? Id like to see about 250 BC to 400 AD if they could produce that many turns. Also because computer hardware is so damn advanced I would like to see DirectX10 graphics also support for older computers too.two roman factions, macedon, athens, sparta, mycenae, belgae, celts, britons, pannonians, germans, carthaginians, seleucids, and many others. Because they have got such a good skill at desinging games I would like to see hordes like huns show up about 190-200 AD and the empire slowly split into east and west. I would also like realistic romans like julius caesar ruler at 70BC and assainated then augustus. and things like a spawned battle of teutoberg forest and spartucus.

[khshayathiya]

mycenae

That doesn't really fit into the timeframe you propose, now does it?

[lemons]

That doesn't really fit into the timeframe you propose, now does it?

Thats right I forgot that mycenae existed I think 1000-600 BC. I meant Plateans they were Athens best friend and they had a formidable army.

[khshayathiya]

The fame of the Plataeans is connected with their long-lasting alliance with Athens. They fought alongside them at the battle of Marathon and gained as a result the isopolity (that is, in case a man of Plataiai moved to Athens, he would have enjoyed the same civic rights). The recognition the citizens of small Plataiai received is probably disproportionate with their actual contribution and importance in the long run and was generated by the Athenian propaganda machine, to show the whole Greek world how well she treated her faithful allies, in the context of growing rivalry between Attica and Laconia which eventually led to the Peloponnesian War.

In reality, the army of Plataiai was far inferior to, say, that of Thebes or Corinth.

[lemons]

The fame of the Plataeans is connected with their long-lasting alliance with Athens. They fought alongside them at the battle of Marathon and gained as a result the isopolity (that is, in case a man of Plataiai moved to Athens, he would have enjoyed the same civic rights). The recognition the citizens of small Plataiai received is probably disproportionate with their actual contribution and importance in the long run and was generated by the Athenian propaganda machine, to show the whole Greek world how well she treated her faithful allies, in the context of growing rivalry between Attica and Laconia which eventually led to the Peloponnesian War.

In reality, the army of Plataiai was far inferior to, say, that of Thebes or Corinth.

I still tink they should have their own faction because most the city-states warred each other.

[theprof739]

Well I think taking the game back to the Peloponnesian War is taking it too far. If the game starts with the death of Alexander (we all know which one), and if the game were to have scripted evets as you supposed, it would start with the Wars of the Successors battling in it out for dominance.
Ending at AD 500 presents a problem too, as how do you fill the 100 AD - 230 AD void when Rome was the primary faction if you included the Dacian wars, revolts, civil wars, and campaigns against raiding germans and Parthians you still have barely enough "meat" to keep things going. I don't dislike your Idea, on the Contrary I would love to play one Roman campaign from 390 BC to AD 1453. That would Rock! And if there is anyone out there listening and with the ability to make that happen, I'll never sleep again.

Unfortunately my skill at modding is nothing compared to my skill as a brainstormer, and my love of history.

[lemons]

That true about 100-250 AD, BUT during 117 AD rome was at its largest and ruled almost all of the KNOWN world. The barbarians started pressing really hard about then also the lower plebs were furious the way they were treated and broke out in large rebellions.

[RenovatioImperii]

playing rome from 200bc to 1500 ad would be something cool... can rome survive the test of time? Can barbarians evolve into kingodms? Or a new holy empire will be founded? there will ever be cusades? Who are involed?
Vikings!

Well guys, that would be fantastic but i doubt that total war series can support this.. A campaign is incredibly long right now, thousand of stacks after few years. Major modifications will needed. Think about keep a campaign up until 1500

I don't want this game become a sort of Civilization (this game was great in the past, but now it really sucks).


PS: it would be cool RIGHT NOW if a mod could in some way export your savegame at the end of RTW and bring it up in MTW2 ahah, this is genious!

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

Yes on all counts but I still think instead of just making at RTWII with improvements from the other two games they need to continue to innovate.

[lemons]

Yes on all counts but I still think instead of just making at RTWII with improvements from the other two games they need to continue to innovate.

thats the whole point! i was just covering some things.

[theprof739]

Well making a game that asted that long would be good if it included a complicated diplomacy system, and adding logistics for army's would make conquering the map nearly impossible.

A long time ago I designed a mod that used 12 turns per year, and made troop movementns equal to what a army copuld travel per month. I realised that you could go acroos the map quickly. So I made recruitment take a long time, (1 turns for peasants, 3 or archers, 4 for auxiliaries, and 6 for legionaries). So some thing like this would also impede you from making conquering armies fast. (of course then fighting the Computer would be a "Stack-a-thon".)

[lemons]

thats cool but I like fighting tons of soldiers. not waiting 6 turns for one unit.

[theprof739]

An army isn't created in a day, it takes time to train men to fight. Having to wait forces players to think about how they deploy their resources, and puts him more in the position of a real general. Having to conserve your forces and use them critically is an important skill. Besides we could make the number of turns to recruit a changable function for all the "Battle Junkies" out there.

[lemons]

An army isn't created in a day, it takes time to train men to fight. Having to wait forces players to think about how they deploy their resources, and puts him more in the position of a real general. Having to conserve your forces and use them critically is an important skill. Besides we could make the number of turns to recruit a changable function for all the "Battle Junkies" out there.

Well, I must say that I am much more action oriented.

[theprof739]

Well there is nothing wrong with that, why do you think humans invented the computer..... To play video games on!