Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

There's a vid on youtube showing some gameplay footage, it looks impressive. Total War has always been a favourite series of mine, even though the AI usually leaves something to be desired...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OHV628oGiU

Wondering who else is looking forward to this next installment.

Care to post this video? And most likely I will get this game when it comes out

edited into first post, not really sure why I neglected to in the first place

I can't wait to lead my legions into battle again...

Roma victor!

PS: bonus points for the release date format

The daddest of all dad games! I'm looking forward to it.

I'm going to be honest: I think my love of the Total War series is helping my grade in my ancient history class. I can actually relate to the tactics used and critique the ancient generals. it really helps my papers in that class.

The question is...can you still play as the Greek City States? It was all about the Μεγάλη Ιδέα

I can't wait to pillage those bastard Romans. For Teiwaz! For Germania!

 rockerbikie wrote:
I can't wait to pillage those bastard Romans. For Teiwaz! For Germania!

Germany was gak in Rome 1. Like really bad. You basically had to spam swordsmen, and only a handful of buildings.

I cannot wait to get my hands on this game! I loved Rome total war and barbarian invasion! We will however forget about that Alexander abortion....

 Testify wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:
I can't wait to pillage those bastard Romans. For Teiwaz! For Germania!

Germany was gak in Rome 1. Like really bad. You basically had to spam swordsmen, and only a handful of buildings.

Axemen, swords were for Gaul.

I actually really like Germania, by far my preferred Barbarian faction. Chosen axemen were amazingly powerful on the offense, able to chop through elite legions with a welltimed warcry and some screeching women to buff even further. Bezerkers with 3 wounds (!!!) and night raiders made a mess of many a civilised battleline. Best of all chosen archers at the rear which could compare with Cretans. Also their basic warband could form phalanx, weird but yeah... Pretty tough IMO, better than Gaul/Spain anyday.

 Testify wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:
I can't wait to pillage those bastard Romans. For Teiwaz! For Germania!

Germany was gak in Rome 1. Like really bad. You basically had to spam swordsmen, and only a handful of buildings.

I know but I like to play as my ancestors. Though as said, they use axemen and combined with other axeman, they are better than Spain and Gaul.

 Testify wrote:

 rockerbikie wrote:
I can't wait to pillage those bastard Romans. For Teiwaz! For Germania!

Germany was gak in Rome 1. Like really bad. You basically had to spam swordsmen, and only a handful of buildings.

You trolling? Germania was and is still my favored faction. So much choppyness and howling women makes for a amusing army

The Barbarian factions were what you played when you didn't want to steam roll the game (or do the gak fest that was Selucia). Hopefully they fix some of the economic imbalance. In Rome 1, seize Greece = insta win and that just took most of the fun out of being Macedon or Greece.

I'd like to see expanded factions. Thrace, Pontus, Parthia, and Iberia namely. Rome Total Realism did them more justice but who knows if we'll get something on that level again.

I bought 1 when it was a pound recently, awesome series and I'd already played shogun 2 to death.
Can't wait.

I'm so pysched about this. Cannot wait.

Ive been a fan of RTW since Time Commanders first aired, im very pleased they are doing a second one. I hope in this one it doesn't take 4 years to sail across the med.

About damn time. Hopefully it's as good M2:TW was, E:TW sucked.

 vodo40k wrote:
Ive been a fan of RTW since Time Commanders first aired, im very pleased they are doing a second one. I hope in this one it doesn't take 4 years to sail across the med.

Ship transport times never made sense in total war.
But hey it also took about 2 years to walk from one side of Greece to the other

 Testify wrote:

 vodo40k wrote:
Ive been a fan of RTW since Time Commanders first aired, im very pleased they are doing a second one. I hope in this one it doesn't take 4 years to sail across the med.

Ship transport times never made sense in total war.
But hey it also took about 2 years to walk from one side of Greece to the other

I think it took 30 years to sail from Portugal to the Americas in M2:TW.

 Amaya wrote:

 Testify wrote:

 vodo40k wrote:
Ive been a fan of RTW since Time Commanders first aired, im very pleased they are doing a second one. I hope in this one it doesn't take 4 years to sail across the med.

Ship transport times never made sense in total war.
But hey it also took about 2 years to walk from one side of Greece to the other

I think it took 30 years to sail from Portugal to the Americas in M2:TW.

I always like to think each "turn" lasts 6 weeks rather than 6 months (although even that is a little steep in some situations).

Meh, just another rehashed old game.

Wish they'd try a different setting. Maybe fantasy or sci-fi, but with the same attention to detail that their historical games have. I loved Rome, but honestly it feels like they're basically just heading for a Call of Duty style franchise.

Except... without the semi-original story that CoD can at least claim to have.

 Amaya wrote:
About damn time. Hopefully it's as good M2:TW was, E:TW sucked.

I agree with that. Med 2 was also my favourite (until Shogun 2 came along anyway). I've found E:TW to be the only bad game in the entire series that I've played (although I didn't get into Napoleon, I blame Empire for that). If you're looking for something to do until Rome 2 is released and haven't played Shogun 2, you should totally check it out. In my opinion it keeps all of the good features from Medieval 2 and improves on them.

 Melissia wrote:
Meh, just another rehashed old game.

Wish they'd try a different setting. Maybe fantasy or sci-fi, but with the same attention to detail that their historical games have. I loved Rome, but honestly it feels like they're basically just heading for a Call of Duty style franchise.

Except... without the semi-original story that CoD can at least claim to have.

I would disagree. I think Medieval 2 marked enough of a change in the technology to warrant going back over. I was much more annoyed about them making Napoleon, which should have been an expansion to Empire, than I am about them making this. Lets not pretend like there was nothing to improve on in Rome. I mean, head hurlers, flaming pigs, roman ninjas, Pharonic Egypt? I just hope we don't have to wait on mods to make this as truly awesome as it should be.

Unit shuffling while rehashing the same exact story and setting.

Meh.

I know I'm being a bit of a downer here, but I'm just kinda tired of the samey sequels.

The game will have vast improvements in graphics, sounds and most importantly gameplay both in the campaign and in battles. Every enhancement brings you that one step closer to being able to walk in the shoes of great Roman conquerors who built one of the greatest empires this world has ever seen.

I don't understand how you can feel this is some rehashed old tale. This is history. Many people have devoted their entire lives to studying this single time period. You don't think it even warrants a sequel when the highly successful original game is 8 (eight!) years old?
If you really think they should be trying fantasy or sci-fi, you are missing the point of Total War games. Besides, that's what mods are for.

 Dunwich wrote:
I don't understand how you can feel this is some rehashed old tale. This is history.

And the most fun part of historical games is fething it up and going an entirely different direction, not merely emulating it. Make your own history! Make an empire GREATER than the greatest conquerer's!

Hell, that's part of the reason why I find the Rot3K games passably fun; with the ability to create your own character and nation, they practically encourage you to do just that.

Total War has always been far more limited than that. You're limited to historical characters and nations only, even if you can break from history in certain ways.

If theres one main thing I have enjoyed about the Total War series so far, it is the attention to detail historical accuracy in regards to unit descriptions, combat tactics and faction identities (although certainly not perfect, its pretty good for a game). I feel it would detract from the overall "feel" of the game if you were simply able to create your own faction and own characters, such a game could be far more easily attained if you made a fantasy mod for one of the existing total war games, where fictional nations would work perfectly.
The total war games still allow a good deal of freedom in regards to creating your own history, the amount of "what if" scenarios in history are ripe for exploration in games like Rome: Total War (eg what if the Romans had been defeated and Carthage and they became the principle Mediterranean superpower instead?).
A TW game with a fantasy setting allowing you to create a custom empire would be very good, however im not sure how a sci fi setting would work in TW (air units and tanks ect would be more difficult to use in the TW format).

How is breaking from history detracting from the overall feel of the game when in the same breath you admit that breaking from history makes the game great?

I would never get tired of playing out the burning white forge of Western civilisation

Did always prefer the Greeks, but for some reason they were a level of cilisation lower than the Romans...no idea why. They should have pretty much the same as Rome, minus maybe the highways (did Rome even have these in its early republican days?).