Φίλε, μήπως έχεις κάποιο πρόβλημα με το ότι οι Ρωμαίοι μας γάμησαν τελείως κατά το τέλος της αρχαίας περιόδου; Πέραν πάσης αμφιβολίας, οι Ρωμαίοι ήσαν ουδέποτε Έλληνες. Πάρε τούτο σα δεδομένο, μη κλαίεις εκ τούτου....
@ComradeMing well dont believe everything about spartans.spartans didnt left papers behind them and most of them are athenian propaganda (like that they were killing babies but it is proved that the dead bones belong to adults) or that they loved war also not true.they didnt like it but they were ready for it.however homosexuality was an OK thing back then.we didnt care that much about sex.in athen the man could have his wife and a female slave that he could fuck.well romans changes shit...
The Greeks didnt had a chance against Rome.There were no chance to get united as long as the hate its other more than any other people.In addition Romes legions were flexible very well armed and trained.They used heavy and light cavalry and war machines in order to offer a deadly blow to anyone who stand in their way.Romes glorious fate was decided after the military transformation in 237 BC.(For the record i am Greek)
The Romans fought the Corinthians, destroying their city and enslaving the population; the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues, as well as sieged Athens and sacked it. I think the Romans and Greeks fought over Greece.
No, the didn't "fght" the corinthians. The corinth's low-minded people insulted the rome's senator(i don't remember) and then the governor of macedon destroyed and burned it.
and put in your mind that greeks didn't lose because they were unlucky,but because romans were stronger...is there something more simple than this?i don't think is too difficult to understand...
huns faced,losing,only the roman armies of the decadent late roman empire...huns never faced the powerful republican and early imperian legions...Gauls weren't united?ahahahaha...romans didn't won because they were lucky,but because they had the strongest army of antiquity(surely stronger than the greek one)...if you say that romans won with luck,then you don't know roman history...
rome didn't saved itelf because of hannibal's indecision...but because romans had 80000 of their best men in rome,while hannibal had 20000 men...it was simply impossible for him,to conquer rome...romans won won the majority of times against germans and parthians(think that the parthian capital was sacked 3 times),but their regions weren't rich enough to justify a roman conquest...
the reason of the ''divide et impera'',it's the classical excuse used by greeks,but it's false...romans used divide et impera,but in greece they faced always the main forces,no matter if some cities didn't participate to the war...no matter if romans had greek allies,or you really think that rodians really helped,with some slingers and ships,the romans against antiocus?and i remind you that romans were outnumbered in greece,as well as in macedon,as well as in turkey
yes Greeks were rich and they were not in Crisis but they lost because they were not united. Romans would never defeat a united Greece. Romans used the divide and Conquer tactic.
And Romans always had as allies the Achaeans against the other Greeks.
but i have to admit that what really entertained me is that they said that romans used the numbers and greeks were in crisis... everyone who knows history knows that greece wasn't in crisis...on the contrary macedon was rich at that period...and about the numbers,romans were outnumbered in all the wars against greeks,macedonians and seleucids...in reality there's a lot of things to say,but i think this is a waste of breath...there's nothing worse than an ignorant sure of what he's saying...
they are all saying impressive things...they said that the greek hoplites were more mobile and stronger than the macedonian phalanx...they confused the parthians and the sassanids with the achaemenid persians...and they said that romans losed to them...and for those who said tha contrary...romans have beaten pyrrhus...and a lot of things that are unbelievable...
there are two kinds of people who don't accept the military superiority of romans over greek:the biased(greeks who are generally irrecoverable,and more brainwashed than the germans in world war II,or lovers of greek history who know all except greek and roman warfare),and the ignorant(people of all nationality who saw 300...and now think they know history)...all these people are a concentrate of ignorance...
by the time the romans had gotten around to fighting the successors, the greeks were in decline. the reason why the romans beat the greeks was not because the greek system was inflexible and rigid (contrary to popular belief), it was becuase the greeks did not have enough funds to support a decent arm of heavy cavalry, which was needed to support the flanks of the phalanx.
if the greeks had been able to use heavy cavalry to decisive effect in their battle against the romans, there is little doubt that they could have won.
The Macedonian phalanx used the sarissa that was sometimes over 18 feet long.The older Thebes plalanx also used long spears (unknown length) and beat the Spartans with those.You can't say "Greeks didn't have pikes that long" cause some did,but not all
@immortal4942 That's not absolutely really, the Northern Greeks (Macedonians) were using 16-19 ft spears to perform the Macedonian phalanx called the Sarissa.
The Spartan an the other southern Greeks used shorter pikes beycause they carried bigger shields than the Maxedonians.
The big thing the Romans brought to the table at this era was the use of quicker smaller formations, and phenomenal swordsmanship the Greeks couldn't hope to match. It's interesting to see how this cycle would later be repeated by the Spanish sword and buckler men who were devastating against pike formations.
I think if it were a battle concerning smarts, the Greeks would win. But like Demandred and I continue to stress, they weren't united, so if they had been I think they could of put up a pretty darn good fight. Hitman is right though. It is impossible to say how the Greeks would fare against Rome's five good emperors. Truthfully, the only ones I like are Marcus Aurelius and Antoninus Pius. There are admirable qualities to both but I like the Greeks more.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the romans are better then the greeks when it comes to millitary might power and strategy which is proven in history when the romans invaded greece.the romans are clearly better
because their empire lasted much much longer.
the greeks were just to girly to fight of the
romans from their lands since the greeks invented homesexuality which rubed of on the romans which led to the collapse of their once mighty and non partly gay empire.
@Demandred02 Homosexuality in Ancient Greece has nothing to do with the current notion. Today we live in a society were women are equal in numbers and rights with men, hence only those that are born feminine become gay. Back then women were restricted to household and were forced to cover their heads (apart from Spartans) like in modern day muslim countries. Men were absent for very long time periods waging war against other cities, living in barracks with other comrades.
@tevang2 There homosexuality was forced to strengthen the relationships between soldiers and be more united in combat. Also the fact that they usually didn't wear any clothes was a means of motivating them to develop a good physical condition. Imagine yourself being raised in a barrack full of naked boys and no girls, and your mentors trying to convince you that having a sexual affair with another man is right...you would become gay. I know is sick. I just don't agree with the term "girlie".
@Demandred02 actually, rome was a greek city state, much like alexandria, one of the many outside Greece. The "Greeks" also had many large empires, just with fighting amongst themselves as well as others, they didn't last. The empire of Alexander the great for example was one of the largest in the ancient world. Macedon was also a greek city state. But most empires lasted only one or two generations. The Athenian empire, lasted only 50 years.
There was no such thing as Gay or straight in antiquity those are modern concepts, The only distinction was Top, bottom the dominate and the passive,The ancient Greeks sexual norms were not unique or any different then their contemporaries and it was almost exclusively the elite that engaged in pederasty ,Effeminacy was met with greater hostility in that period of history then in our own contemporary culture because of the level of misogyny & Machoism.
@number11jaanz are u a dumb ass the greeks were taken when they were about six years old and basically tortured to become the amazing warriors they were... so ur callin greeks gay but the fact is u really dont know anything about the greeks they had SPARTAN warriors which were one of the best warriors in history so take a spartan shield and hits ur self in ur balls and head.... trust me it hurts motherfucker!
Sorry, but the Greeks were original. The Romans took a lot of their ideas from engineering, architecture, art, and military weapons, let alone their mythology. Some aspects of this game are unrealistic. They give Rome too much of an advantage. You have to remember that back then, the city-states of Greece weren't really united, so it obviously would be easy for the Romans to conquer them. Don't get me wrong, Romans are my second favorite of ancient civilizations.
and you should not take alot of deaths unless they have siege equipment if they do send caverly to attack in hit and runs they should leave them to fiht the caverly
one of the ways to win campagin as greeks is have an army with spartans and archers and the best caverly you will use the archers as the enemies march towards your phalanxes and the spartans will do the rest then use the caverly to do a mop up of any surving troops
OMG!!! This was GREAT!!! AMAZING camera work!! And good historical accuracy! This is exactly how the Romans defeated the Greeks! I'm not sure if you knew that or not but it is. Pester their phalanxes with javelins and arrows then CHARGE!!!!! Lol XD LOVED IT!!!
if G vs R its better to have more troops then other.phalax is hard to defeat from the front but sides are vunarable and they have no other heavy infrantry to protect their sides
This is a custom battle. You should be able to play the greek cities in a custom battle. If you have done the roman campaign you should also be able to play the greek campaign. There is also a cheat or something to be able to play all factions but i don't know how that works.
you have to destroy the faction that you want to play as WITH one of the roman factions. to play as the greeks, you only have to capture like 4 settlements... it ain't that hard.
dude wars back in da day were sooo much cooler!! lool its stupi now adays like u push a butten and sum1 dies halway around the earth!! lool sure war isnt worth it no matter what but still
wtf u cant say anithing u americians have wot 400 years worth ov history mate i dnt no anithing bwt dis stuff aniway all america is is 1 big plce wer foreigners move 2 so ders no such thing as puier americians u sound lyk u shud learn more stuff man lol
That's a joke lol... when I was greeks I fucking smashed the Romans. Eygpt and Macedonia were the only hard factions I faced. I've won battles with 5 groups of armored hoplites against 15 tripii (don't remember how to spell it.
when i play this game i alway play as greece cuz of the falanx i alway make a circle and i u do it right u cant lose a battle even if outnumdered. someone try it and get back to me
Romans were more.If romans atack the falanx,you DONT MOVE the falanx,you just wait so the half roman batallion dies instandly.Also the Greeks were better and if you putted to them some support troops also,they would have win
selusid are also a Greek kingdom after Alexanders death.
Also friends listen this:Let the political propagandas aside,and don't let the south slavs convince you that Alexander and the macedonians were not Greeks.Just let you know
@Galuadan Yah like Dovlex said...In game when your agenst a computer....And anyways...In RL....Greece had NOOO chance agenst Rome...Or atleast in the ancient times when they were both powerful
Hey guys do not forget how many times WE the greeks fought between us.. Athens vs Sparta vs Megara vs Korinthos.... One city state always wanted to have the control of all Greece.. What's an important reason how we fell by Macedonians and Romes.. Besides city states were the reason who defeat the great Persian Empire.. And under The Great Greek Macedonian Alexander Greece was again unites.. 2 times WE fought as Greece and were enough to leave our mark:)!
Hey, guys just remember how Greece fall by Macedonia and Rome... The only thing WE used to do is civil war. Athens vs Sparta vs Megara vs Korinthos vs Crete.... Simply one city-state wanted to have control of all country... Besides a city states have stoppen The Great persian empire... one of the few tinmes Greeks were united.. and again under The Great Greek Macedonian Alexander... 2 times of the greek union were enough to leave our mark..!!!!!
You should do a vid with the Macedonians against the roman legions. I always played with the Macedonians and even on the hard battle settings I always kicked Rome's ass, even if I was outnumbered. The phalanx, if used wisely, is just an amazing weapon!
etc. So in the end, both were great. I prefer the Greek history but still I loved the Roman empire. Sorry theres some errors and that it went on forever, and I know theres lots more, but I don't want to keep you reading.
They would've been repelled. The greeks didn't take italy as a threat, even Alexander considered trying to conqueor to the West after taking Babylon. However the Roma area was still uncontrolled and considered nothing to be feared, and so it was thought as nothing. I would've loved to see some-sort of memorable war against Rome and Greeks. However all good empires come to an end. Eventually the Romans well into the same trap as Greeks, they split into two, feuds, rebellions....
often in the centre line. They wen't on to great things and were the greatest empire of all time. However could've Greeks/Macedonians conqueor Rome if they were in there prime? There would be a good chance. Greeks didn't just have phalanxs, they also had Hypaspists who were in many ways a fighting force, they were just as strong in many aspects and could've, but Rome hit them when they were weak, if Rome had developed 200 years before they started seiges on Greeks.
When they invaded Greece and Macedonia, it was an easy taking, most of Greece was taken over fairly easily and Macedonia still wasn't anywhere near fit for a fight. Rome in a way gave Greeks freedom and let them keep there cities, but there was some rebellions, but they were easily squashed. Rome wen't on to conqeuor much of what Alexander had conqueored and even more, they also adopted the Phalanxs formation as-well, but it wasn't as popular as the Testudo, but it was still used, and used
town/small cities for land. They eventually a large area of Italy and versed many barbarians from the Southern area, they eventually won, took all of Southern italy and started to build up there armies. Eventaully they started there campaign, making a small 'human' wall across the Northern part of Italy as outpost of attacking and defending legions. They got inspiration from the Greeks in their architecture (sorry if I spelt it wrong) and then started to create large fortifications.
It then took Thrace and killed there king and even made plans of taking over the Persian Empire, sending fleets to clear a path, but once again the Greeks turned against him on the worst possible time and sent there armies over to the Persians as a sort of alliance, even though they were once ruled by them.
Alexander wouldn't have gotten where he was without Philip.
Rome was still developing when most of this was happening, and they were originally farmers towns which fought with other...
Macedonias Phalanxs and even get the original lands back from his surrounding nation. He then went on to get more of his South-East land back from the Greeks who were currently city-states. Created alliances with Athens and then take over all of Greece except the reluctant Sparta (will need to research if they did or didn't take sparta.) and then created a new foundation for the greek states so they were still 'not ruled' by 'Macedonian Barbarians' but as Philip as a representative.
The topic of the Greeks and Romans has been a debate for many years. Greeks could've ruled the world and Roma if they were so stubborn. Instead of holding the loose nation together after Alexanders death, the generals fought for succession and eventually broke apart. I love Philip, Alexanders Father who ruled before him. He took the throne of Macedonia when it was in the worst possible state, when Thracians, Ill. etc were on his back and he still was able to defeat them, reform the milita of....
even though i destroyed all these factions i can only play as some af them. and no i didnt just outlast them i destroyed them. its the second campaign in witch i destroy macedon. why can i only play as some of them???
plus why dont you give the Romans some Urban Cohort and some Praetorians instead of Hastati n shit.. You used the Greek Elite (Spartans) so why dont u use the Roman Elite
the Spartan sticked to traditional forms of tactics and the Romans adapted to more modern conventional means, which is why Greece got OWNED. they hardly put up a fight or else it would say more in the history books about it. since Carthage actually gave Rome a challenge its noted alot in history text books.the Last Samurai for example. the reason why the samurai got pwnd is cuz they stickd to traditional warfare techniques while the other army adapted to modern, efficient tactics//techonogies.
omne thhings ibve notices works if you set your hopilites up lite /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ your flanks stay relativley secur and if any ifantry charfe you one of thier flanks it automaticly opened up to the other side of the V
Another thing is the reason the romans infantry is kept so spread out like that is so you can have room to move around and flank with that set up something ass simple asn haveing one unit halt 10 feet behind the other would give you an opening in the phalanx to sweep through and cause chaos with
both empires are good at warfare..But no empire lasts long..both greek and romans had their downfall at some point of the time..And in my own opinion, if the greeks and romans will have a fight, i bet the romans will win..why?coz the greeks dont USUALLY sue archers but slingers instead and they dont have much artillery..unlike rome, they use a massive amount of archers and artillery which they have as an advantage..and the phalanx formation wont work on the romans..
the spartans may have started fighting from an early age but they stuck to much to tradition and didnt modernise their warfare style which led to their defeat many times not only to other greek city states such as athens but also to the romans. the phalanx was obsolete by the time the romans came along
The testudo allowed more flexibility rather than standing like a retard statue with the phalanx. No wonder the Greeks lost to the Romans. Stop watching 300 and open a historyh book. Asshole.
The greatest warriors were the Romans. If the Greeks, were so good, they would have beaten Rome, but the Romans beat the Greeks when they Greeks were at their best.
Romans.... they stole the Greeks mythology, then both religions were killed by Christianity and catholicism
FalconsPOWN2 6 days ago
i like both i am not against any of them cuz i love italians and romans .I'm just against the turks lool x
OTHno3Lucas 1 month ago
Φίλε, μήπως έχεις κάποιο πρόβλημα με το ότι οι Ρωμαίοι μας γάμησαν τελείως κατά το τέλος της αρχαίας περιόδου; Πέραν πάσης αμφιβολίας, οι Ρωμαίοι ήσαν ουδέποτε Έλληνες. Πάρε τούτο σα δεδομένο, μη κλαίεις εκ τούτου....
CommissarASSHOLE 1 month ago
how did you make this movie, it looks amazing!
MrDextroGuy 1 month ago
----
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
THE BLOOD OF ROMAN IS GREEK
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
---
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
----
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
--------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
----
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
----
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
----------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
----------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
---------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
-----------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
---------
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
@ComradeMing well dont believe everything about spartans.spartans didnt left papers behind them and most of them are athenian propaganda (like that they were killing babies but it is proved that the dead bones belong to adults) or that they loved war also not true.they didnt like it but they were ready for it.however homosexuality was an OK thing back then.we didnt care that much about sex.in athen the man could have his wife and a female slave that he could fuck.well romans changes shit...
panosmel97 2 months ago
whats with everyone calling them pikes ,,its either sarissa or spear,,, the name pike only came from the middle ages
thepaulypaul1 4 months ago
The true battle of superpowers every other empire besides british would fail in comparison to what romans and greeks accomplished.
xXxFadeX2XBlackxXx 8 months ago
is this rome total war?
ah0410 1 year ago
@ah0410 Of Course It is !
medievalkiller10 11 months ago
one cuestion: the name the game???
elmanudelnew 1 year ago
@elmanudelnew this is total war: rome.
S1llyPerson 1 year ago
i hate it when people bitch that the greeks suck and all but look at the romans at teutoburg forest the germans ripped them an new asshole
bladedxmarine 1 year ago
yeah victory to rome !!:D
The2boys1cup 1 year ago
it's very easy to beat the greek phalanx:
-charge with infantry from the front(you will lose many soldiers)
-archers pour down fire arrows
-cavarly makes a wide circle and atack them from the back
As we know a phalanx is good from the front.......from the sides and rear it sucks
fortzasteaua1234 1 year ago
WHAT GAME IS THIS SOMEONE PLEASE RESPOND!!!!!!
drbadn3ws 1 year ago
@drbadn3ws this is total war: rome.
S1llyPerson 1 year ago
This is SPARTAH!!!!!!
sasorinodanna13 1 year ago
Greece is just amazing at war...
petrosz12 1 year ago
I think ur forgetting the part about spartans never surrender or retreat in like all of what they do
stevejake164 1 year ago
The Greeks didnt had a chance against Rome.There were no chance to get united as long as the hate its other more than any other people.In addition Romes legions were flexible very well armed and trained.They used heavy and light cavalry and war machines in order to offer a deadly blow to anyone who stand in their way.Romes glorious fate was decided after the military transformation in 237 BC.(For the record i am Greek)
oddavramftw 1 year ago
8:48 hey guys wait for me!!
PrincipleOfEvil666 1 year ago
wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow
MrHRLK 1 year ago
Wow cool video but just a pity that the Greeks had fled. Were the Spartans were not allowed to me is 5
dawios1947 1 year ago
i cant choose over rome and greece
Dannyekimyan 2 years ago
can't believe that we lost....
benandjohnnyfans 2 years ago
you should''ve exploited the gaps between the phalanxes and sorround them
avemnevoiesideiarba 2 years ago
The Romans and Greeks didn't fight over Greece...it was Rome and Macedon.
DrakeVonDeath 2 years ago
The Romans fought the Corinthians, destroying their city and enslaving the population; the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues, as well as sieged Athens and sacked it. I think the Romans and Greeks fought over Greece.
eXcommunicate1979 2 years ago
No, the didn't "fght" the corinthians. The corinth's low-minded people insulted the rome's senator(i don't remember) and then the governor of macedon destroyed and burned it.
TheRoopeKonna 2 years ago
Pretty sure the Corinthians fought back. I would consider that "fighting."
eXcommunicate1979 2 years ago
@DrakeVonDeath yeah yeah shut up now
benandjohnnyfans 2 years ago
@benandjohnnyfans
I'll shut up when you have an actual argument.
DrakeVonDeath 2 years ago
and put in your mind that greeks didn't lose because they were unlucky,but because romans were stronger...is there something more simple than this?i don't think is too difficult to understand...
romandef 2 years ago
huns faced,losing,only the roman armies of the decadent late roman empire...huns never faced the powerful republican and early imperian legions...Gauls weren't united?ahahahaha...romans didn't won because they were lucky,but because they had the strongest army of antiquity(surely stronger than the greek one)...if you say that romans won with luck,then you don't know roman history...
romandef 2 years ago
rome didn't saved itelf because of hannibal's indecision...but because romans had 80000 of their best men in rome,while hannibal had 20000 men...it was simply impossible for him,to conquer rome...romans won won the majority of times against germans and parthians(think that the parthian capital was sacked 3 times),but their regions weren't rich enough to justify a roman conquest...
romandef 2 years ago
the reason of the ''divide et impera'',it's the classical excuse used by greeks,but it's false...romans used divide et impera,but in greece they faced always the main forces,no matter if some cities didn't participate to the war...no matter if romans had greek allies,or you really think that rodians really helped,with some slingers and ships,the romans against antiocus?and i remind you that romans were outnumbered in greece,as well as in macedon,as well as in turkey
romandef 2 years ago
at least here there are also informed people,who really know history...
romandef 2 years ago
yes Greeks were rich and they were not in Crisis but they lost because they were not united. Romans would never defeat a united Greece. Romans used the divide and Conquer tactic.
And Romans always had as allies the Achaeans against the other Greeks.
BloodyAres 2 years ago
part 2
btw I love Rome but I have to say they have been very lucky
1) Hannibal waited one day to attack, this day saved rome
2) Greeks were not united
3) Gauls were not united, if they all followed Vercingetorix, Romans would never prevail
Whenever Romans had no luck they always were beaten, Look at Parthans and Germans and Huns.
BloodyAres 2 years ago
but i have to admit that what really entertained me is that they said that romans used the numbers and greeks were in crisis... everyone who knows history knows that greece wasn't in crisis...on the contrary macedon was rich at that period...and about the numbers,romans were outnumbered in all the wars against greeks,macedonians and seleucids...in reality there's a lot of things to say,but i think this is a waste of breath...there's nothing worse than an ignorant sure of what he's saying...
romandef 2 years ago
they are all saying impressive things...they said that the greek hoplites were more mobile and stronger than the macedonian phalanx...they confused the parthians and the sassanids with the achaemenid persians...and they said that romans losed to them...and for those who said tha contrary...romans have beaten pyrrhus...and a lot of things that are unbelievable...
romandef 2 years ago
there are two kinds of people who don't accept the military superiority of romans over greek:the biased(greeks who are generally irrecoverable,and more brainwashed than the germans in world war II,or lovers of greek history who know all except greek and roman warfare),and the ignorant(people of all nationality who saw 300...and now think they know history)...all these people are a concentrate of ignorance...
romandef 2 years ago
by the time the romans had gotten around to fighting the successors, the greeks were in decline. the reason why the romans beat the greeks was not because the greek system was inflexible and rigid (contrary to popular belief), it was becuase the greeks did not have enough funds to support a decent arm of heavy cavalry, which was needed to support the flanks of the phalanx.
truewarriorgod10000 2 years ago
if the greeks had been able to use heavy cavalry to decisive effect in their battle against the romans, there is little doubt that they could have won.
truewarriorgod10000 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
they should add unit superior legion with atk 18 def 28 missle 22
treocaotedau 2 years ago
Comment removed
treocaotedau 2 years ago
the greeks didnt have pikes that long in reallity. the used 9 feet long spears (doru) not 16 feet ones as portrayed in rtw.
immortal4942 2 years ago 5
The Macedonian phalanx used the sarissa that was sometimes over 18 feet long.The older Thebes plalanx also used long spears (unknown length) and beat the Spartans with those.You can't say "Greeks didn't have pikes that long" cause some did,but not all
BillyVax 2 years ago
@immortal4942 they had 5-6 metres pikes
macedonians had sarissa
shitbomp 1 year ago
@immortal4942 That's not absolutely really, the Northern Greeks (Macedonians) were using 16-19 ft spears to perform the Macedonian phalanx called the Sarissa.
The Spartan an the other southern Greeks used shorter pikes beycause they carried bigger shields than the Maxedonians.
ElijahofAthens 9 months ago
@immortal4942 true but they did go on to get 16 and 18 Foot long pikes later in history
BTW dovlex nice job on the movie!!!!
MisterPat1911 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TOMA ESTE AVISO
1. pon tu dedo en la nariz
2. deten la respirasion por 5 segundos
3.di el nombre de tu amor
4. esa persona te ba a preguntar que si quieres ser su novio(a) el siguiente viernes
5. tendras el mejor dia manana
6. sino copias y pasas este mensaje a otros 2 videos tendras mala suerte y muriras en 2 dias
Andy35241V2 2 years ago
Comment removed
Mitsosoriginal 2 years ago
i wish the world stil faught with swords and stuff..... would be way more awesome
if the world was also in a state of war just marching all proud with a sword and sheild or spear or a bow
l2bbenjamin 2 years ago
i haven't played rtw in 2 years because my friend borrowed my cd and didn't return it and my dad sold the cpu with the rtw game inside XD
kidasterorig111 2 years ago
are the romes the gold or the silver
singhatar0966 3 years ago
The romans are the ones in dresses, the greecks are the ones in the skirts :). and please, know you're history and you would know.
woarboar 2 years ago
Ooor, you could say, the greecks have the mohawks and the romans the pony tails :)
woarboar 2 years ago
nice movie...really felt realisctic. Love the soundtrack
00Jose00 3 years ago
The big thing the Romans brought to the table at this era was the use of quicker smaller formations, and phenomenal swordsmanship the Greeks couldn't hope to match. It's interesting to see how this cycle would later be repeated by the Spanish sword and buckler men who were devastating against pike formations.
chiconspiricy 3 years ago
i thought a onager rock would hit the last hoplight that would of made my day
Trudog190 3 years ago
I think if it were a battle concerning smarts, the Greeks would win. But like Demandred and I continue to stress, they weren't united, so if they had been I think they could of put up a pretty darn good fight. Hitman is right though. It is impossible to say how the Greeks would fare against Rome's five good emperors. Truthfully, the only ones I like are Marcus Aurelius and Antoninus Pius. There are admirable qualities to both but I like the Greeks more.
Jwmocha 3 years ago
good jab camera man ,very well done
mowza123 3 years ago
job*
mowza123 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the romans are better then the greeks when it comes to millitary might power and strategy which is proven in history when the romans invaded greece.the romans are clearly better
because their empire lasted much much longer.
the greeks were just to girly to fight of the
romans from their lands since the greeks invented homesexuality which rubed of on the romans which led to the collapse of their once mighty and non partly gay empire.
number11jaanz 3 years ago
I agree in that their military power and strategies were a lot better but that argue that their empire lasted longer is a thin one.
Also that greeks were to girly? and gay?
The Greek weren't an united country that's why they weren't such a huge empire.
Also just like Jwmocha said, the romans copied their gods from greeks and many ideas they just changed their names and few minor things.
Demandred02 3 years ago 16
@Demandred02 Homosexuality in Ancient Greece has nothing to do with the current notion. Today we live in a society were women are equal in numbers and rights with men, hence only those that are born feminine become gay. Back then women were restricted to household and were forced to cover their heads (apart from Spartans) like in modern day muslim countries. Men were absent for very long time periods waging war against other cities, living in barracks with other comrades.
tevang2 1 year ago
@tevang2 There homosexuality was forced to strengthen the relationships between soldiers and be more united in combat. Also the fact that they usually didn't wear any clothes was a means of motivating them to develop a good physical condition. Imagine yourself being raised in a barrack full of naked boys and no girls, and your mentors trying to convince you that having a sexual affair with another man is right...you would become gay. I know is sick. I just don't agree with the term "girlie".
tevang2 1 year ago
@Demandred02 actually, rome was a greek city state, much like alexandria, one of the many outside Greece. The "Greeks" also had many large empires, just with fighting amongst themselves as well as others, they didn't last. The empire of Alexander the great for example was one of the largest in the ancient world. Macedon was also a greek city state. But most empires lasted only one or two generations. The Athenian empire, lasted only 50 years.
BoyleUK 10 months ago
@Demandred02
There was no such thing as Gay or straight in antiquity those are modern concepts, The only distinction was Top, bottom the dominate and the passive,The ancient Greeks sexual norms were not unique or any different then their contemporaries and it was almost exclusively the elite that engaged in pederasty ,Effeminacy was met with greater hostility in that period of history then in our own contemporary culture because of the level of misogyny & Machoism.
Obasiliasfilosofos 9 months ago
@Demandred02 the greeks werent that big as an empire? gay? everywhere were gays and read more history if u are about to make this kind of comments
Dniparxis 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Demandred02 No person can be too gay.
Zevarye 5 months ago
@number11jaanz are u a dumb ass the greeks were taken when they were about six years old and basically tortured to become the amazing warriors they were... so ur callin greeks gay but the fact is u really dont know anything about the greeks they had SPARTAN warriors which were one of the best warriors in history so take a spartan shield and hits ur self in ur balls and head.... trust me it hurts motherfucker!
ATOMIKPENGUIN117 3 months ago
Sorry, but the Greeks were original. The Romans took a lot of their ideas from engineering, architecture, art, and military weapons, let alone their mythology. Some aspects of this game are unrealistic. They give Rome too much of an advantage. You have to remember that back then, the city-states of Greece weren't really united, so it obviously would be easy for the Romans to conquer them. Don't get me wrong, Romans are my second favorite of ancient civilizations.
Jwmocha 3 years ago 3
Roman vitcory!
findus3d 3 years ago
and you should not take alot of deaths unless they have siege equipment if they do send caverly to attack in hit and runs they should leave them to fiht the caverly
iain0910 3 years ago
one of the ways to win campagin as greeks is have an army with spartans and archers and the best caverly you will use the archers as the enemies march towards your phalanxes and the spartans will do the rest then use the caverly to do a mop up of any surving troops
iain0910 3 years ago
Wow
Perfect Camera!
That was very good
Waiting for the next one^^
Drgora 3 years ago
the game is rome total war??
zenolla 3 years ago
really nice camera work roman victor!
narnode 3 years ago
Wow. today they only use buttons and missiles.
namanamara 3 years ago
OMG!!! This was GREAT!!! AMAZING camera work!! And good historical accuracy! This is exactly how the Romans defeated the Greeks! I'm not sure if you knew that or not but it is. Pester their phalanxes with javelins and arrows then CHARGE!!!!! Lol XD LOVED IT!!!
Sharkbait132 3 years ago
if G vs R its better to have more troops then other.phalax is hard to defeat from the front but sides are vunarable and they have no other heavy infrantry to protect their sides
thedaliyroman2 3 years ago
Sick Game =]]]]
Carthaginians Own always =]]]
borderhopper619 3 years ago
if you can't win without ussing elephants sht up, please? ussing elephants is easy
thephilippe 3 years ago
Brotha i dont need elephants to win =]]]]
borderhopper619 3 years ago
well then that alot better =P, i prefer seleucid empire, they got huge spears hehe, one solid infantry block and some heavy cavalry, victory is mine
thephilippe 3 years ago
fuck yea the seleucids own too =]]
borderhopper619 3 years ago
Seleucids own even more!
Sharkbait132 3 years ago
oh MAN! i thought you were playing as the greeks there for a second.
Brandonly23 3 years ago
when i play this game i can only play as theromans and i hate playing as the romans how do i play as a different faction plz get back to me
daveisthebest01 3 years ago
This is a custom battle. You should be able to play the greek cities in a custom battle. If you have done the roman campaign you should also be able to play the greek campaign. There is also a cheat or something to be able to play all factions but i don't know how that works.
Kippenbestaan 3 years ago
you can easy unlock the factions ;) just look in your folder from rome total war or download the RTW tool :) have fun ;)
gleke
gleke 3 years ago
you have to destroy the faction that you want to play as WITH one of the roman factions. to play as the greeks, you only have to capture like 4 settlements... it ain't that hard.
Brandonly23 3 years ago
dude wars back in da day were sooo much cooler!! lool its stupi now adays like u push a butten and sum1 dies halway around the earth!! lool sure war isnt worth it no matter what but still
leo8182008 3 years ago
wtf u cant say anithing u americians have wot 400 years worth ov history mate i dnt no anithing bwt dis stuff aniway all america is is 1 big plce wer foreigners move 2 so ders no such thing as puier americians u sound lyk u shud learn more stuff man lol
aspeymcvsvoltagemc 3 years ago
you should learn to spell before you insult someone
lunthegun 3 years ago
Sorry, i didn't understand anything you wrote there buddy.
lordvivec87 3 years ago
no pure americans? wat about indians huh dude you need a history book
thqsuks 3 years ago
ahahahaha the greek guy in the end!!! so funny XD
cool video
dpsantos1994 3 years ago
That's a joke lol... when I was greeks I fucking smashed the Romans. Eygpt and Macedonia were the only hard factions I faced. I've won battles with 5 groups of armored hoplites against 15 tripii (don't remember how to spell it.
Mango3330 3 years ago
Rome kick Greece
vovancena 3 years ago
youve read your history, notice the roman checker board formation
kratosprometheus 3 years ago
wow nicely put out vid of this battle
ANBUkakashisaiyan 3 years ago
guys is the seluciad empire playable??
unknown20125 3 years ago
Yes, but you either have to defeat it or win as a non-Roman faction first - either that or do a bit of simple modding.
Rogue0071 3 years ago
I would pick the Greeks everytime over the Romans
14Teutonic 3 years ago 2
same here
samsquantches 3 years ago 2
well the greeks or any other of the diodachi factions but yes, same
kratosprometheus 3 years ago
when is was playing greek i kick the roman ass so badly
FabulousGreekBabe 3 years ago 2
cmon greece and italy fucking brothers!!!
goonbots 3 years ago 3
when i play this game i alway play as greece cuz of the falanx i alway make a circle and i u do it right u cant lose a battle even if outnumdered. someone try it and get back to me
KELZO1984 3 years ago
yes somthing like my tactic but when egypt attack me they have so fucking many archers and i must attack them every time.
dovlex 3 years ago
@KELZO1984 You do know that if you go into the game files you can let other Factions have those units
HuntingKnight 1 year ago
Rome f***...W the Greek!!!!
zan933 3 years ago
Romans were more.If romans atack the falanx,you DONT MOVE the falanx,you just wait so the half roman batallion dies instandly.Also the Greeks were better and if you putted to them some support troops also,they would have win
Galuadan 3 years ago
yes only in game, when play agains computer.
Greece are asskick but selucid is stronges faction in game.
dovlex 3 years ago
selusid are also a Greek kingdom after Alexanders death.
Also friends listen this:Let the political propagandas aside,and don't let the south slavs convince you that Alexander and the macedonians were not Greeks.Just let you know
Galuadan 3 years ago
they were another nation idiot.
Ghaseken 3 years ago
@Galuadan its phalanx
worldwarsproductions 1 year ago
@Galuadan Yah like Dovlex said...In game when your agenst a computer....And anyways...In RL....Greece had NOOO chance agenst Rome...Or atleast in the ancient times when they were both powerful
HuntingKnight 1 year ago
how did you do that with the camera
EdBond 3 years ago
ROMAN S*** :D long live the german tribes
oly355 3 years ago
It looked like Rome was getting demolished, but then they came back!
Bollettimo 3 years ago
Hey guys do not forget how many times WE the greeks fought between us.. Athens vs Sparta vs Megara vs Korinthos.... One city state always wanted to have the control of all Greece.. What's an important reason how we fell by Macedonians and Romes.. Besides city states were the reason who defeat the great Persian Empire.. And under The Great Greek Macedonian Alexander Greece was again unites.. 2 times WE fought as Greece and were enough to leave our mark:)!
skotous21 3 years ago
Hey, guys just remember how Greece fall by Macedonia and Rome... The only thing WE used to do is civil war. Athens vs Sparta vs Megara vs Korinthos vs Crete.... Simply one city-state wanted to have control of all country... Besides a city states have stoppen The Great persian empire... one of the few tinmes Greeks were united.. and again under The Great Greek Macedonian Alexander... 2 times of the greek union were enough to leave our mark..!!!!!
skotous21 3 years ago
Man, that's a shitload of units on battlefield!! How you did that?? Is there a way to break the fucking unit limit? Great video though!!
alcibiade666 3 years ago
You should do a vid with the Macedonians against the roman legions. I always played with the Macedonians and even on the hard battle settings I always kicked Rome's ass, even if I was outnumbered. The phalanx, if used wisely, is just an amazing weapon!
alcibiade666 3 years ago
well done
Spartanboy3000 3 years ago
etc. So in the end, both were great. I prefer the Greek history but still I loved the Roman empire. Sorry theres some errors and that it went on forever, and I know theres lots more, but I don't want to keep you reading.
~Sensi
SensiKarate 3 years ago
They would've been repelled. The greeks didn't take italy as a threat, even Alexander considered trying to conqueor to the West after taking Babylon. However the Roma area was still uncontrolled and considered nothing to be feared, and so it was thought as nothing. I would've loved to see some-sort of memorable war against Rome and Greeks. However all good empires come to an end. Eventually the Romans well into the same trap as Greeks, they split into two, feuds, rebellions....
SensiKarate 3 years ago
often in the centre line. They wen't on to great things and were the greatest empire of all time. However could've Greeks/Macedonians conqueor Rome if they were in there prime? There would be a good chance. Greeks didn't just have phalanxs, they also had Hypaspists who were in many ways a fighting force, they were just as strong in many aspects and could've, but Rome hit them when they were weak, if Rome had developed 200 years before they started seiges on Greeks.
SensiKarate 3 years ago
When they invaded Greece and Macedonia, it was an easy taking, most of Greece was taken over fairly easily and Macedonia still wasn't anywhere near fit for a fight. Rome in a way gave Greeks freedom and let them keep there cities, but there was some rebellions, but they were easily squashed. Rome wen't on to conqeuor much of what Alexander had conqueored and even more, they also adopted the Phalanxs formation as-well, but it wasn't as popular as the Testudo, but it was still used, and used
SensiKarate 3 years ago
town/small cities for land. They eventually a large area of Italy and versed many barbarians from the Southern area, they eventually won, took all of Southern italy and started to build up there armies. Eventaully they started there campaign, making a small 'human' wall across the Northern part of Italy as outpost of attacking and defending legions. They got inspiration from the Greeks in their architecture (sorry if I spelt it wrong) and then started to create large fortifications.
SensiKarate 3 years ago
It then took Thrace and killed there king and even made plans of taking over the Persian Empire, sending fleets to clear a path, but once again the Greeks turned against him on the worst possible time and sent there armies over to the Persians as a sort of alliance, even though they were once ruled by them.
Alexander wouldn't have gotten where he was without Philip.
Rome was still developing when most of this was happening, and they were originally farmers towns which fought with other...
SensiKarate 3 years ago
Macedonias Phalanxs and even get the original lands back from his surrounding nation. He then went on to get more of his South-East land back from the Greeks who were currently city-states. Created alliances with Athens and then take over all of Greece except the reluctant Sparta (will need to research if they did or didn't take sparta.) and then created a new foundation for the greek states so they were still 'not ruled' by 'Macedonian Barbarians' but as Philip as a representative.
SensiKarate 3 years ago
The topic of the Greeks and Romans has been a debate for many years. Greeks could've ruled the world and Roma if they were so stubborn. Instead of holding the loose nation together after Alexanders death, the generals fought for succession and eventually broke apart. I love Philip, Alexanders Father who ruled before him. He took the throne of Macedonia when it was in the worst possible state, when Thracians, Ill. etc were on his back and he still was able to defeat them, reform the milita of....
SensiKarate 3 years ago
that was sweet
carl123man 3 years ago
greece is now greece again and rome is well italy
coolsnipers 3 years ago
lol i've pwnd all greeks after four days
first day i didnt destroy any faction
second day i destroyed macedon and thrace
third day i destroyed greek cities
fourth day i utterly destroyed selucids
this is the fourth day :b
ps. its on hard.
even though i destroyed all these factions i can only play as some af them. and no i didnt just outlast them i destroyed them. its the second campaign in witch i destroy macedon. why can i only play as some of them???
LasseUldam 3 years ago
I have to say that was a great simulation of pre-marius warfare. Nice overall camera moving to!
poseidon8118 3 years ago
Romans wiped out the spartans guys...lol
Newt0rz 3 years ago
dude what is this game i want it !!!!
undertakerbesteva 3 years ago
Rome total war. An awesome game, but maybe go for Medieval Total war 2, the graphics are EVIL!
mrfabricius 3 years ago
rome total war
LilDas187 3 years ago
plus why dont you give the Romans some Urban Cohort and some Praetorians instead of Hastati n shit.. You used the Greek Elite (Spartans) so why dont u use the Roman Elite
hoboplasm 3 years ago
the Spartan sticked to traditional forms of tactics and the Romans adapted to more modern conventional means, which is why Greece got OWNED. they hardly put up a fight or else it would say more in the history books about it. since Carthage actually gave Rome a challenge its noted alot in history text books.the Last Samurai for example. the reason why the samurai got pwnd is cuz they stickd to traditional warfare techniques while the other army adapted to modern, efficient tactics//techonogies.
hoboplasm 3 years ago
omne thhings ibve notices works if you set your hopilites up lite /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ your flanks stay relativley secur and if any ifantry charfe you one of thier flanks it automaticly opened up to the other side of the V
Lokazi420 3 years ago
Another thing is the reason the romans infantry is kept so spread out like that is so you can have room to move around and flank with that set up something ass simple asn haveing one unit halt 10 feet behind the other would give you an opening in the phalanx to sweep through and cause chaos with
Lokazi420 3 years ago
Roman strategy was blow the shit out of with artilery and archers then send in infantry to clean up survivors
Lokazi420 3 years ago
both empires are good at warfare..But no empire lasts long..both greek and romans had their downfall at some point of the time..And in my own opinion, if the greeks and romans will have a fight, i bet the romans will win..why?coz the greeks dont USUALLY sue archers but slingers instead and they dont have much artillery..unlike rome, they use a massive amount of archers and artillery which they have as an advantage..and the phalanx formation wont work on the romans..
avengerizer16 3 years ago
the greeks didn't have an empire until alexander the great walked in. before that it was all independent city states.
LilDas187 3 years ago
the spartans may have started fighting from an early age but they stuck to much to tradition and didnt modernise their warfare style which led to their defeat many times not only to other greek city states such as athens but also to the romans. the phalanx was obsolete by the time the romans came along
TD146 3 years ago
The palanx sucks. It's inferior to a Roman turtle formation which allows a chance for more flexibilty even while heavily covered.
madmaxninja08 3 years ago
the phalanx was 1 of the greatest formations in all of greece. The testudo is the weakest formation u dumbass!!!!!!
LilDas187 3 years ago
The testudo allowed more flexibility rather than standing like a retard statue with the phalanx. No wonder the Greeks lost to the Romans. Stop watching 300 and open a historyh book. Asshole.
madmaxninja08 3 years ago
obviously i've read more history books than u have b cuz the greeks were THE GREATEST WARRIORS IN MILITARY HISTORY!!!!!
LilDas187 3 years ago
The greatest warriors were the Romans. If the Greeks, were so good, they would have beaten Rome, but the Romans beat the Greeks when they Greeks were at their best.
So learn history again fagboy.
madmaxninja08 3 years ago
if the romans were so "good" then y did they loose against the weakest race of all time - the persians?! who's the fagboy now bitch?!
LilDas187 3 years ago