New videos from Gamestar

[Jugurtha King of Numidia]

People who do this (pause the videos, zoom-in and highlight small things out of place that you don't actually notice when you're playing the game) remind me of moon landing and 9/11 conspiracy theorists. "You can see here, if we move frame-by-frame, the rear of the phalanx collapses early...as if it were a controlled demolition."

Don't even go there about 9/11...Only a fool believes the lies...

[killua]

People who do this (pause the videos, zoom-in and highlight small things out of place that you don't actually notice when you're playing the game) remind me of moon landing and 9/11 conspiracy theorists. "You can see here, if we move frame-by-frame, the rear of the phalanx collapses early...as if it were a controlled demolition."

[Dan113112]

Soldiers in ancient times fought in formations but if a phalanx behind galloping cavalry, the back of the phalanx should turn to him. And just when the horse got stuck near the phalanges one phalanx of soldiers should kill him. quickly. And anyway the horse does not have to be stuck. Those soldiers who are close to the horse to turn his head towards him and kill him.

This never happened in reality. Possible but it never happened. It'd probably break the formation. Also, even if the rear of the phalanx could turn to face the cavalry charge would cause enough impact to scare the phalangites facing the other way and cause them to route. Thus causing the entire formation to route. There's a reason why Alexander had auxiliary forces behind his phalanx at Gaugamela and why he had Agrarians and Hypaspists defending the phalangites.

[Rittsy]

Looks far less mechanical than the original Rome; which is both good and bad. Good because it's far more realistic to not have formations move as a single, perfect rectangle with no mass to it; bad because there was always something oddly satisfying about controlling the a perfectly disciplined robot army.

...but there's already a game for the latter, so I look forward to a more realistic style of play.

For the people who say the battles are too fast: after playing EB and RTR VII, I could go for a few battles that don't last 45 minutes.

Is it me or do these guys release better info than that paranoid company CA and their scripted sequences?

Yeah but look at the overreaction from some people in this thread. "The game is bad because the units are running, blobbed together and charged one unit!"...all result of unscripted player actions.

[Vallon]

For the people who say the battles are too fast: after playing EB and RTR VII, I could go for a few battles that don't last 45 minutes.

So I guess it has to be either super fast arcade style or super slow EB-realism style, there's no possibility for something in between?

I for one, hope they slow down the battle speed a bit. I think the battles in EB are a bit too slow, but I'd rather have slow battle where thinking and forward planning is rewarded rather than a battle where the fastest clicker is the winner.

[Rittsy]

So I guess it has to be either super fast arcade style or super slow EB-realism style, there's no possibility for something in between?

I for one, hope they slow down the battle speed a bit. I think the battles in EB are a bit too slow, but I'd rather have slow battle where thinking and forward planning is rewarded rather than a battle where the fastest clicker is the winner.

No...but these don't look Shogun II equivalents. Units appear to be holding their ground and fighting and men aren't absolutely booking like the previous title. This looks like a happy middle.

Whilst I enjoy slow battles as well, part of being a great commander would have been being the "faster clicker"; being able to take advantage of opportunities as soon as they appear rather than hanging back, and responding quickly to enemy maneuvers...and I say this as I eat cornchips and sit on a swivel chair so my experience is litterally zero in this field. Anyway, I guess we'll see how we both feel when the game comes out. If it's a big problem, I'm sure the community wont keep quiet and CA might make adjustments.

[davieholgate]

Looks far less mechanical than the original Rome; which is both good and bad. Good because it's far more realistic to not have formations move as a single, perfect rectangle with no mass to it; bad because there was always something oddly satisfying about controlling the a perfectly disciplined robot army.

...but there's already a game for the latter, so I look forward to a more realistic style of play.

For the people who say the battles are too fast: after playing EB and RTR VII, I could go for a few battles that don't last 45 minutes.



Yeah but look at the overreaction from some people in this thread. "The game is bad because the units are running, blobbed together and charged one unit!"...all result of unscripted player actions.

Thats funny, because it was only a while ago where a guy was allowed to file a lawsuit against sega for witholding the real details and dramatically changing things in a worse direction of the gameplay videos, and false advertising...

[alQamar]

Thats funny, because it was only a while ago where a guy was allowed to file a lawsuit against sega for witholding the real details and dramatically changing things in a worse direction of the gameplay videos, and false advertising...

keep me updated

[naiveharry]

Good job leaking info, good stuff!!!! now I want more

[Captain W. Handberg]

The siege deployables during the fort defense in the first video seem like a good idea, and quite cool too. I love how cavalry can jump over things like they do in the said video(also seen in Epirus trailer).

[Swe_gamer]

Nice stuff, especially the sieges.

Flaming spears though, hmm.

[perablenta]

It looks like an older build of the game. So just nice to get a quick fix of watching it and nothing there to judge.
And the way that player played the game... best not to say anything.

[Dan113112]

And the way that player played the game... best not to say anything.

Agreed. If that's the way most people play it's actually kind of sad. I consider myself a casual TW player and I always play more tactically than that.

[Terminus Est]

It looks like an older build of the game. So just nice to get a quick fix of watching it and nothing there to judge.
And the way that player played the game... best not to say anything.

I've read a comment on youtube that says this is not from gamescon but from a test 2 months ago. The video says it's from gamescom though :p

[DavidtheDuke]

I think this looks very good, when the units were being blobbed (by the player mind you), the Roman infantry kep formation and killed in a machine like way. I can't remember which video but they assaulted a artillery unit and the hastati kept formation while mechanically advancing chopping as they went.

[pajomife]

The speed must be modded,and the clash between two or more units seems to be much unrealistic.

[Rittsy]

The speed must be modded,and the clash between two or more units seems to be much unrealistic.

I thought the opposite. Seems more fluid and confusing, so more "realistic" to me.

[kxin]

What is happening at 5:00 in the first video? looks like only the cavalry is attacking the fort, and the foot soldiers remain far from battle waiting to be engaged by the player... if reminds me a lot of CAI bugs from olders total war.

[Suite]

Music, sound, battle map are great. Javelin/pila animations and me still no buddies.

[Greve Af Göteborg]

That looks dull compared to Rome 2.