Login

03-06-2003, 04:07 AM

Oh I'd like to jump in here and dispute the assertion that infantry can do anything that cavalry can. 
 
To take 2 examples 
 
- 600 Persians (200 horse and 400 foot) all archers vs 10,000 Greek infantry as writen about by Xenophon in his Anabasis - the Greek infantry were helpless vs the Persian archers because they could never catch them. 
 
When they put 50 Hoplites onto horses they were able to chase the Persians off and cause some casualties. 
 
Cannae - The Carthaginian cavalry on their left flank defeated their Roman opponents, marched around behind the Roman infantry and hit the otehr Roman cavalry flank in the rear, then encircled the Roman infantry - a demonstration of mobility in battle that no infantry ever came close to achieving. 
 
Cavalry had tactical mobility on the battlefield - it could pick and chose where to attack a slower foe, and use it's mobility to attack exposed positions that infantry would take too long to reach. 
 
There can be no serious question of infantry do the job of cavalry....the two had different roles in teh ancient world and neitehr was capable of doing the job of the other. 
 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=stickers>Stickers</A> at: 3/17/03 12:38:35 am

JRSCline · 03-06-2003, 03:51 PM

You guys, if this thread does not come back around to TOTAL WAR: ROME real soon, I will send it to Off Topic. Start a new thread in the OT forum if you'd like to discuss the comparative qualities of cavalry, infantry, etc. 
 
Thanks! 
Jenny

StrategyM · 03-07-2003, 10:51 AM

Sorry about that, JRS. I'll go right over and report myself to the principal. 
 
Guys - read my earlier replies; the answers to your comments have already been made. Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
[url=http://"http://www.fenrir.dk/"]Imperium - Rise of Rome[/url]

03-07-2003, 02:10 PM

Thanks Jenny, guess I got caught up in the discussion 
Magnus/Matt 
Optio 
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix"

JRSCline · 03-07-2003, 06:16 PM

It happens! 
 
So does anyone know anything new about TW:R? 
 
JC

03-14-2003, 01:40 AM

There's a Rome TW forum at www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/...nboard.cgi - under "coloseum" that may be of interest.

03-24-2003, 03:10 PM

Hello all; 
 
Just found this board. 
 
Anyway - for a VERY good FAQ on what is known, right now, about RTW go to this link; 
www.fourbelowzero.com/mod...opic&t=133 
 
The Fourbelowzero board is hosted by a guy who has a good relationship w/ Creative Assembly - the series developers - so he recieves some good info. before the public. The totalwar.com boards are a bit too immature for my tastes - too many kids, too much wild speculation - still there are some who post there who know a thing or 2 about actual history. 
 
Regarding R:TW specifically; 
1. The screens seen so far are early efforts and should not be taken as an indication of the finished product (pilums will be in the game for instance - that Centurion screen was mislabeled - those are Hoplites). 
2. Liberties will be taken w/ accuracy as the game does need to flow. Yet it should give one a feel for the period (264 BCE - 14 CE) and - of course - those 3D battles will be mighty impressive. 
3. I am hoping that the rumored "faction"specialization in units/capabilities and the increased importance in terrain (due to the close relationship between strategic and tactical levels) will further enrich the experience so that the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" roots do not show that much. 
 
Finally, the production values of all TW games are 1st class - and M:TW was a large improvement on S:TW - so I expect this latest effort to be another big step forward. 
 
Can't wait till November. 
 
Regards, 
Barkhorn.

JRSCline · 03-24-2003, 05:38 PM

Thanks for the info! I'm really looking forward to seeing it myself. 
 
J.

03-26-2003, 02:19 PM

Thank you JRS - I will keep the board posted on any updates of substance. 
 
I am reading posts in the other sections and am very impressed by the knowledge of the posters on this board. 
 
Some background on myself; 
 
I have (war)boardgamed since I was 10 years old - that's about 30 years ago(). 
 
I own Avalon Hills Alexander the Great and Seige of Jerusalem. I assisted in the design of the "on-line" counters for the e-mail version of SOJ - until the author decided to simplify them - too bad too as my versions were very cool. 
 
BTW, this version is still available - if anyone is interested I will dig up a link. 
 
Went to computer games about 5 years ago - flight sims mostly (which explains my very robust system) - but I do have the Great Battles series. 
 
This brings me back to the whole RPS argument regarding Shogun and Medieval. Sure they have their drawbacks - but on the whole there is a "naturalism" (on the tactical level) about them that is lacking in the Great Battles series which is much too "gamey". Of course these games were fine at the time but nowadays the power of the PC allows so much more in terms of graphics and background algorithims (sp?) that I can only look at Paetorians and Legion as sad jokes. 
 
The "Imperium" concept sounds interesting - but the guys site is down and I wonder if he will; 
 
a. Actually complete it 
b. Have a tactical component at all 
 
Regards, 
Barkhorn.

StrategyM · 03-26-2003, 10:32 PM

Barkhorn wrote: 
Quote:<hr>The "Imperium" concept sounds interesting - but the guys site is down and I wonder if he will; 
a. Actually complete it 
b. Have a tactical component at all<hr> 
 
The site has been a little unstable of late (webhotel having server troubles). However, in most cases clicking the "refresh" button will bring the website up. 
 
On your queries: 
a) Yes. You have my word on that, for what it's worth. I still can't, unfortunately, give a timeline for the project, but there is progress, and I expect to be adding some screenshots of the revamped game interface with the April update. 
b) The battle engine for the tactical component has already been 80% coded (and has seen some testing), but lacks a proper GUI. It has been temporarily placed on hold while development on the other aspects of the game are being completed, but an integrated strategic-tactical engine is and remains a crucial part of the Imperium "vision". 
 
Won't be R:TW style battles though - I'm more interested in making something manageable by the AI, than to have spectacular gameplay values. A balance somewhere between the TW games and the battles in Legion (and not necesarrily Real-Time, though I lean more toward that now than I did before). Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
[url=http://"http://www.fenrir.dk/"]Imperium - Rise of Rome[/url]

03-27-2003, 06:50 PM

Thanks for the reply StrategyM. 
 
Your site still seems to be down but I will keep checking. 
 
Regards, 
Barkhorn.

StrategyM · 03-27-2003, 07:52 PM

Just noted there was an error in the URL of my sig. Try this one. Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
Imperium - Rise of RomeEdited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=strategym>StrategyM</A> at: 3/27/03 8:53:25 pm

03-27-2003, 08:38 PM

Read through everything this time and am quite impressed. 
 
I have no issues w/ a WEGO tactical system - if it will help the AI. Can you queue orders?? Would that even make sense in light of how you are focusing all commands on the general?? 
 
Looking forward to some screenshots. 
 
Real time does flow better - IMO - on a tactical scale. It is absurd on a Strategic or even Operational level. 
 
If you need another tester I would be happy to help just let me know. 
 
Regards, 
Barkhorn.

StrategyM · 03-27-2003, 10:21 PM

Don't want to hijack this thread any further (or JRS will get after me ), so will try to be brief. 
 
No queuing of orders no; wouldn't make much sense. But the jury is still a little bit out on whether to make it WEGO with a timer as the design currently stands, or simply to make it pure real-time with the traditional space-bar pause (and some strong mechanisms to limit the player's command ability). From a game engine point of view there really isn't that big a difference, and it might flow somewhat better. 
 
Testing of the tactical system has been put on ice for the moment, but keep an eye on the forum particularly as the other aspects of the game nears completion. Strategy 
Designer/Developer 
Imperium - Rise of Rome

03-28-2003, 03:52 AM

One pet peeve I've always had, is that strategy games never set the level of your command. What I mean is, are you commanding from the General/Legate level, or centurio/Captain, or even decanus/section commander? My point is this, the level of control should be dicated by what level in the chain of command the game is centered around. More control for those at the lower echelons, and less, but not restricted (since orders were assuredly passed on to the ranks through horns, radios, etc.) at the higher level. 
 
Does this make sense Strategy? I just hated it when my armies weren't able to maneuver once ordered, or the opposite, when you have to micro-manage and your left flank is being smashed by armour, and you can't do anything because the troops you are trying to order are walking straight ahead and being run over by tanks and you have to re-order <inhales another deep breath> each one individually because there seems to be a lack of chain of command..... wooooooo!!!! 
 
 
Magnus/Matt 
Optio 
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix"

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Rome..Total Realism Question and one for Total War version	arklore70	1	1,782	02-15-2006, 12:06 PM Last Post: Optio equitum