@JeffHardy9swan the AI is like that you prob know already/ they would do that on hard to. ive seen many things on my greek campaign. but i player Darthmod much more challengeing
a good line of hoplites with some pelasts and a unit or two of heavy calvery = instant win. thats why greeks are supirior to romans, ESPECIALLY if you get some spartans in the phalnx
phalanxs in this game, long as you kept them together were, nigh impossible to break i hgated having to face them and especially the macidonian and silver guys cus their pikess are even longer!
easy diffuculty its pretty obvious...and stop calling greeks arabs because only FYROM ppl call as that way cuz they start to realize that the accusations they throw are meant for them(slavs actually not arabs) xD
Greeks didnt exist back then.Greece is made in 1975 after the Royal danish family left the previus colony.The colony was made in 1830 and ruled by German King ,then Danish.People of present Greece are middle easteners arabs and africans ethyopians plus roma people.They were brought in europe as workers by Turks.The language dimotiki is made in 1976 for the first time.So there is no greek hoplites.
Nope the Term Greek didnt exist back then.Its invented in 19th century you stupid ignorant idiot.If you mention the word Greek back then they would look at you as funny idiot. Its the same if you say that USA is ancient Mexico ,or Canada was ancient Australia etc.Those states were not greek those people were not arabs like present Greeks ,those people were europeans and they were diferent nationalities capish ???Dorians,Tebans,Atenians,Spartans-not Greek.I cant belive you are so stupid.
@sitlord75 the term greek did exist back then but it was translated γραικός,aristotle and many others said that people used to be greeks and then hellines
@sitlord75 please,go to wikipedia and search greece so maybe you can learn some things about it,because your comment made you look as retarded as it can get
@hiddenThecakeisalie I personaly would not attempt to charge hoplites straight on in RTW but a few times the AI has charged my full strength 5 rank hoplite formations and decimated them! To be fair (to the computer?) when this happens it is usualy the generals cavalry that charge into unseasoned hoplite units... but all the same hoplites in RTW can be defeated by a frontal cavalry charge.
@merisparta uhmm hardly... its about the same... rome contributed just as much as greece.... after pericles greece didnt really do anything other than be conquered and wut not.
i dont see macedonians anywhere in this battle. the hoplites are all greek. it even says GREEK VS. ROMAN. that said its arguable that macedon could be considered greek themselves
@laketahoethebest you're right, Macedonians are a separate faction in ROME:TOTAL WAR. Having said that, all the Greek city states fought in pretty much the same way, all using Hoplites.
the hoplite & long-spear phalanx systems remained up to firearms even later (e.g. spanish & flemish tercios etc.) and were used by a vast number of different cultures. Legionaire system was never employed by anyone else because it had been too much consuming in terms of money and men...
that said, Romans had always a presentable army. But if you study statistically their results, there is nothing impressive.
With armies of 300,000 and up to 800,000 (their high maximum) anyone could do it
the stupid AI always runs greek general unit into phalanx , even if its under your control as greeks/macedon/seleucids and a phanlanx is nearby it just charges in and greeks ahve weak general with lowest armour stats and no shield.
y was it called the Holy Roman Empire? i mean it encompasses Germany and Poland, the Romans only conquered Germany for a little wile, and they never even got to Poland.
It was called that because the Kaiser was supposed to be crowned by the Pope and be the protector of Christendom and the Papal States. Funny thing was that the Empire was not Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. By the time Napolean disbanded the empire in 1815 the empire was actually a confederation of over 300 states!
which kaiser? lol yeah thats right, Germany was just a group of states, but they were united under Otto Von Bismark. of course he was a Prussian ruler. i guess they could be called an "empire", i mean look at the Austro-Hungarian "empire", they were more like 2 or 3 nations combined under 1 ruler. now Napoleon had an "empire". lol
Otto von bismarck wasn't really a rular. He was chancellor but the ultimate authority lay with the Kaiser. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was actually an empire but nationalization tore the country apart. Napolean did have a unified French Empire but he had a lot of vassal states like the Grand Duchy of Warsaw and the Confederation of the Rhine
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The Most Seccesful warfare in the world was The Egyptian warfare and The Roman Warfare, Egyptians used Spearmen and Attacking Axe and Sword Infantry, while used Charioteers to break formations instead of elephants in some other nations, while romans used stable infantry the same as Egyptians, but Phalanx are not useful in fact because phalanx were made to Stop the attackings and block ways, but not for kill, while Egyptian warfare's objective was to kill
''turks conquered them all''...wtf???muhahaha!what a dumbass!what do the turks have to do with anything here?they didn't even exist back then...they're totally irrelevant!this video is about greek hoplites and roman legionnaires-learn to read...
yeah and yet the siege of constantinople took over 8 weeks when you guys had monster bombards. 180,000 troops vs 8000 troops half mercanries. We won major battles until your sultan said you guys have to keep fighting youll take whatever you want. Then the greeks revoultion in 1821. a few guys with guns destoyed your imperial goverment. And dont use mazikert the other roman general left not even fighting so he could crown somone else emperor. EAT THE FACTS OF HISTORY MY DIRTY MONGOL FRIEND>
cause you can move them back if the enemy makes a move, this guy's just noob -_-;; besides, you usually place artillery in front so you can advance in front of them after they take a few shots.
And cavalry on any sort, would NEVER attack a phalanx head on as shown here. That would be suicide. Horses are dumb, but not that dumb. You can't make a horse, however well trained, throw itself onto a wall of spears. If you charged a phalanx at full gallop like that, the horses would stop short of the phalanx and the riders, whose saddles didn't even have stirrups would be thrown to the ground helpless in front of the hoplites. Dead meat.
i have 2 points to make, 1 this is just a game, u take it too seriously and 2 you seem to like the romans, im really interested in them too, i always play as them in games like these
I just think if a game of this sort is to be made it should be made right. I have played RTW and found it disapointing on many levels. There is a RTW realism modification called Europa Barbarorum, which is simply excellent. The units, their gear, movement, fighting techniques, etc, are as close to the real thing as I've ever seen. I don't understand why the original developers couldn't have done so well. Plain wrapper RTW is a joke compared to Europa Barbarorum. It's vastly superior.
And yes, I do like the Romans. I admire the way the Romans approached many things, and their attitude toward the world. One word: Pragmatism. A small village on the banks of the Tiber that would one day rule the world. After two millenia, what they did is still stunning.
Roman armies did not (if their consular commanders were wise) did not attempt to tackle a hoplite phalanx head on. That would be folly. Instead, they would attempt to envelop a phalanx and force it out of its linear style of "forwards/backwards" combat, and force it to fight along multi angles of defense where is would crumble and its formation would break down. The Roman manipular formation excelled at this.
Try Europa Barbarorum mod for RTW. It's a realism mod with historically accurate weapons, armor, tactics, language, etc. Basically, it's what RTW should have been. It really changes the game ALOT. Hoplites for example don't fight in the pike phalanx but more as a shield wall. Romanophiles are in for a shock cause their in game bonuses don't exist. You have to fight as the romans using Roman tactics or you get STEAMROLLED by the Hellenistic hoplites and phalangites.
Go to the EB site. They have an extensive tech support forum. You need to completely remove all RTW files from your hard drive. Make a clean install of RTW. Patch it to 1.5, if your version is that already, install EB 1.1, then install the EB 1.2 patch over it. Then restart and run the EB validation program from the start menu. To run it you need Java. If you have Vista, make sure to install it OUTSIDE of program files.
EB is buggy with Vista due to Vista's security and anti-piracy software. Installing EB outside of the program files directory solves a lot of these issues. Also run the program as administrator. Just right click over the icon and select run as admin.
Mmhm...but 1 million versus 100 (balanced individual troops), 1 million would probably win no matter what tactics the 100 used.
If it's outnumbered like 3 to 2, tactics play decisive roles. But outnumbered by 4 to 1 or something, tactics usually mean moot, and instead you focus on preserving your army with a skillful retreat or to cause as many casualties as possible, not winning. Of course it is possible (18 armoured elephants against thousands of peasants)
None of them. Brutii family in real weren't in war, and scipio's family's eyes were turned to sicily and africa. Julii too didn't do it, because that family weren't exist or weren't in war. Rome didn't conquer greece, they destroyed Macedon's empire of macedons greek provinces. Romans gived freedom for Greece. At Augustus imperium, Greece were claimed to rome's province .
not tactics? thats the most stupid thing i ever heard... when Roman Legions were facing the Macedonian Phalanx they "suprised" them beacuse the phalanx had a complicated way of formation it took a lot time for soldiers to get in possition.. anyway even so Macedons were winning but Romans pulled them to a "bad" shaped ground where the phalanx formation couldnt be used.. and so they won.. oh and dont forget "divide and conquer".
I meant the ground tactics, like "hammer and anvil". Of course romans had tactics, in larger formation. Their commanders weren't any kind of threat to enemy, but still there were some great ones, like Flaminius, who conquered Macedon, and Julius Caesar ect. They used theur ground tactics first time at Zama, so that is what i ment. I totally agree that, were the Romans pulled Macedonian phalanxes to lowground for the Macedonians. Sorry for that.
@psypsynos that is partially the truth... the truth is that IN BOTH BATTLES (which amazing!) the same thing happened: Macedonian heavy phalanx was winning against Roman legionaires while Macedonian light infantry was losing to Roman light infantry (actually allies from the rest of Greeks who were allied to Romans). It would be easy though for Macedonian army to give the final tap but the cavalry refused to enter in the most crucial moment and fled the battle.
@papagamias Why treason from the cavalry? Well the cavalry was Macedonian aristocrats. And aristocrats opposed the last 2 kings of Macedonia as too populists. They wanted to go back to feudalism. Romans promised them that.
It is eye-popping that right after the Pydna battle, there were found 1000s of pro-Romans among Macedonians "who chased anti-Roman Macedonians and such"...
... in reality Romans had already won politically before the war. What happened in the battles was a minor detail.
@papagamias In practice, the Romans never proved their military superiority over Macedonians or any other Greek. In fact, Roman tactics were only suitable for a vast army of the size of Romans (at 2nd B.C. century was already more than 300,000 when Greek armies were on average around 10,000 each, the army of Macedonian kings alltogether around 50,000).
When Romans of the 400 A.D. could not gather so many anymore, they changed the legion system altogether.
There are a TON of different units and all sorts of construction restrictions (you can't conquer a new city and start building Urban Cohorts there). Expansion is slow and Roman armies require a lot of logistical support or else you have to depend on a lot of native troop types. VASTLY superior game.
I liked EB... but it's not my dream mod. At first, all of the differences between the vanilla and the mod was so awesome. But the bad thing was that because the mod holds so much, each turn takes awfully long-maybe 1 minute or so-compared to the vanilla's 10 seconds. and also, i don't really like EB's terribly hard-to-grow economy. Denarii was better than Mnai. I found Makedon the most fun to play. The only thing I like about EB now is the 4-season year, 'stead of the 2-turn year.
Another problem with EB is that although the fact that now soldiers die much less frequently (an entire unit being routed in 10 seconds in the vanilla is just ridiculous), EB's "realistic" battles, featuring units that will fight for maybe 5 minutes or so, is sometimes too long. Another thing I love about EB is that the map is enlarged, to the Indus and the Arabian Peninsula. I wish RTW vanilla was made with the goods of EB, and the goods of itself.
Roman soldiers of both the Marian and Polybian forms were substancially superior to the Hellenic armies. Flexibility over rough ground and better organization allowed Romans troops a level of flexibility and maneuverability that the Hellenic hoplite just couldn't cope with. Toward the later Hellenic periord, the Greeks tried to adapt to the Romans by discarding the heavy armor and long spears in favor of fast troops that also carried missiles. Heavy peltasts for example.
what about the other phalanx factions ie macedonians selucids thracians carthaginians egyptians (sort of pontus and germany) or any faction that uses tactics well
why do almost everybody likes to see roman lose and get owned and fight them you know they were a great and noble empire. plus when they falled all of europe went in hell
Have u seen the position the Western Roman Empire is at the start of the game?
They got literally no money, a small crap army and lots of rebellions and barbarian enemies. (The Eastern Roman Empire is in a better position but they have to deal with the friggin sassinids
go to the game options, click the box that says 'more options' or something like that, then you have an option to change unit size from 'normal' to 'huge'
multiplayer or: go to the game options, click the box that says 'more options' or something like that, then you have an option to change unit size from 'normal' to 'huge''.
oh and btw i play on very hard :) can u tell me pliz how to play online ? cuz when i enter on multiplayer and click host or those thingies says something like invalid cd key :-??
Lol the difficulty was on easy right cause if I played I kik ur ass and who charge ye calavary into spearmen lol
,,
JeffHardy9swan 10 months ago
@JeffHardy9swan the AI is like that you prob know already/ they would do that on hard to. ive seen many things on my greek campaign. but i player Darthmod much more challengeing
deadmansguide 8 months ago
Are they nuts? Throwing away cavalry in a phalanx?!
davy13682 11 months ago
a good line of hoplites with some pelasts and a unit or two of heavy calvery = instant win. thats why greeks are supirior to romans, ESPECIALLY if you get some spartans in the phalnx
desciencenut 11 months ago
charging calvary at phalnx isn't the brightest Idea
neoioneo310 1 year ago
i hope there comes a Rome total war 2.
Why i love Rome total war but i hate the graphics of it and i miss the real action
jogamer275 1 year ago
phalanxs in this game, long as you kept them together were, nigh impossible to break i hgated having to face them and especially the macidonian and silver guys cus their pikess are even longer!
spitandfire 1 year ago
@spitandfire The key to beating Phalanxes is Archers, sadly I never use archers so I rely on numbers!
kenshin444447 1 year ago
@camisinging Oh, I hate this kind of people so much...
It is sarcasm you idiot. How old are you? 6?
migkillerphantom 1 year ago
easy diffuculty its pretty obvious...and stop calling greeks arabs because only FYROM ppl call as that way cuz they start to realize that the accusations they throw are meant for them(slavs actually not arabs) xD
RegretForNothing 1 year ago
Greeks didnt exist back then.Greece is made in 1975 after the Royal danish family left the previus colony.The colony was made in 1830 and ruled by German King ,then Danish.People of present Greece are middle easteners arabs and africans ethyopians plus roma people.They were brought in europe as workers by Turks.The language dimotiki is made in 1976 for the first time.So there is no greek hoplites.
sitlord75 1 year ago
@sitlord75 they were Greek city states fraction dumass
camisinging 1 year ago
Nope the Term Greek didnt exist back then.Its invented in 19th century you stupid ignorant idiot.If you mention the word Greek back then they would look at you as funny idiot. Its the same if you say that USA is ancient Mexico ,or Canada was ancient Australia etc.Those states were not greek those people were not arabs like present Greeks ,those people were europeans and they were diferent nationalities capish ???Dorians,Tebans,Atenians,Spartans-not Greek.I cant belive you are so stupid.
sitlord75 1 year ago
@sitlord75 the term greek did exist back then but it was translated γραικός,aristotle and many others said that people used to be greeks and then hellines
ReyColons619 9 months ago
@sitlord75 please,go to wikipedia and search greece so maybe you can learn some things about it,because your comment made you look as retarded as it can get
ReyColons619 9 months ago
The Roman Empire shall live again!
(maybe)
bookercreator 1 year ago
greek slaves fighting for the romans ... they r killing their own countrymen ... oh well rome rules
Ghost22595 1 year ago
Hah
MrRandalFlagg 1 year ago
king slayer!
holyboddy 1 year ago
thats so vanilla xd
campesino6969 1 year ago
lol. Cavalry running right into spearmen? This HAD to be AI!
hiddenThecakeisalie 1 year ago
@hiddenThecakeisalie I personaly would not attempt to charge hoplites straight on in RTW but a few times the AI has charged my full strength 5 rank hoplite formations and decimated them! To be fair (to the computer?) when this happens it is usualy the generals cavalry that charge into unseasoned hoplite units... but all the same hoplites in RTW can be defeated by a frontal cavalry charge.
woodkerne 1 year ago
i miss rome total war, i liked the ancient history and its melee combats
jayhaoliao 1 year ago
i prefer the greeks because i'm greek.Greece is more historical country than italy
merisparta 1 year ago
@merisparta uhmm hardly... its about the same... rome contributed just as much as greece.... after pericles greece didnt really do anything other than be conquered and wut not.
EmperorofAwesome 1 year ago
The worst thing you can do is to attack a phalanx head on with cavalry...
Desicionoflife 1 year ago
@Desicionoflife you sould attack the flanks of the phalanx because there wike
ikaros332 1 year ago
awesome game and good vid!!
unscspec123 1 year ago
i dont see macedonians anywhere in this battle. the hoplites are all greek. it even says GREEK VS. ROMAN. that said its arguable that macedon could be considered greek themselves
laketahoethebest 1 year ago
@laketahoethebest you're right, Macedonians are a separate faction in ROME:TOTAL WAR. Having said that, all the Greek city states fought in pretty much the same way, all using Hoplites.
MoveOnSoulClub 1 year ago
now thats real history
SCE2OXSaturn5 1 year ago
forget about Roman army. think better about roman diplomacy. that is what made their empire.
papagamias 1 year ago
the hoplite & long-spear phalanx systems remained up to firearms even later (e.g. spanish & flemish tercios etc.) and were used by a vast number of different cultures. Legionaire system was never employed by anyone else because it had been too much consuming in terms of money and men...
that said, Romans had always a presentable army. But if you study statistically their results, there is nothing impressive.
With armies of 300,000 and up to 800,000 (their high maximum) anyone could do it
papagamias 1 year ago
not the roman empire cause the units are pre marian so therefore replublic times :)
lennydale92 1 year ago
the stupid AI always runs greek general unit into phalanx , even if its under your control as greeks/macedon/seleucids and a phanlanx is nearby it just charges in and greeks ahve weak general with lowest armour stats and no shield.
sushanalone 1 year ago
your cavalry are noobs charging pikes
imnotabear 1 year ago
no the cavalry arent the noobs the player is
kevin123636 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch popular TVShows at W W W . TV-Vide . NET
karleylilah 2 years ago
lol the Mercanarie hoplites Phalnax was destroyed right away
sirmed1 2 years ago 2
StoKeS~S0beR<-------- 2009
CHRISAKASOBER 2 years ago
the ottoman empire fall after world war 1.which was the longest lasting empire in the world.but they lacked the, well just about everything.
grandjedimaster09999 2 years ago
empire total war doesn't have Greece Army< if you want to play by Greece You should play by Ottmans. :)
saad6633 2 years ago
yeah didn't they also take out the HRE? I was hoping to reunite the german states in the game and give rebirth to the empire :p
Well I guess I can play as Prussia...
micah9639 2 years ago
yep :)
saad6633 2 years ago
what's HER??
saad6633 2 years ago
HRE. Holy Roman Empire
micah9639 2 years ago
y was it called the Holy Roman Empire? i mean it encompasses Germany and Poland, the Romans only conquered Germany for a little wile, and they never even got to Poland.
FrieLegos 2 years ago
It was called that because the Kaiser was supposed to be crowned by the Pope and be the protector of Christendom and the Papal States. Funny thing was that the Empire was not Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. By the time Napolean disbanded the empire in 1815 the empire was actually a confederation of over 300 states!
micah9639 2 years ago 15
which kaiser? lol yeah thats right, Germany was just a group of states, but they were united under Otto Von Bismark. of course he was a Prussian ruler. i guess they could be called an "empire", i mean look at the Austro-Hungarian "empire", they were more like 2 or 3 nations combined under 1 ruler. now Napoleon had an "empire". lol
FrieLegos 2 years ago
Otto von bismarck wasn't really a rular. He was chancellor but the ultimate authority lay with the Kaiser. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was actually an empire but nationalization tore the country apart. Napolean did have a unified French Empire but he had a lot of vassal states like the Grand Duchy of Warsaw and the Confederation of the Rhine
micah9639 2 years ago
around 250 AD the entire Roman Empire converted to Christianity, and thus we have the Holy Roman Empire.
MrNoahthefox95 2 years ago
football is just like a war but u dont kil leach other
lifes40123 2 years ago
I heard one sound saying 'off side'.. LOL, does this suggest that the source of football is from acient war?
LenoeZ 2 years ago
it might be there was no defence beside the General, so they have to return the Ball to the middle :). lool
saad6633 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The Most Seccesful warfare in the world was The Egyptian warfare and The Roman Warfare, Egyptians used Spearmen and Attacking Axe and Sword Infantry, while used Charioteers to break formations instead of elephants in some other nations, while romans used stable infantry the same as Egyptians, but Phalanx are not useful in fact because phalanx were made to Stop the attackings and block ways, but not for kill, while Egyptian warfare's objective was to kill
EgyptianGreatMan 2 years ago
2:24 the king slaughtered he just slide ^^
poor king don't know how 2 run.......'
(this is a joke im a fan of greek lol)
albert24killer 2 years ago
Sorry but, Turks conquered them all...
AMERICANTURKISHPOWER 2 years ago
''turks conquered them all''...wtf???muhahaha!what a dumbass!what do the turks have to do with anything here?they didn't even exist back then...they're totally irrelevant!this video is about greek hoplites and roman legionnaires-learn to read...
steveharrismetalgod 2 years ago
WTF
carlitoxflota 2 years ago
yeah and yet the siege of constantinople took over 8 weeks when you guys had monster bombards. 180,000 troops vs 8000 troops half mercanries. We won major battles until your sultan said you guys have to keep fighting youll take whatever you want. Then the greeks revoultion in 1821. a few guys with guns destoyed your imperial goverment. And dont use mazikert the other roman general left not even fighting so he could crown somone else emperor. EAT THE FACTS OF HISTORY MY DIRTY MONGOL FRIEND>
MurdingMonster 2 years ago
I wonder if anyone knows that the ottoman army had many christian mercs in their army. Even their Janissaries were from christian families
micah9639 2 years ago
I'm not sure about what you're saying,
but , surely there were christians in the Ottman empire, but not that numbers ( can't compare it to the muslims number)
Coz Ottman empire gave them the Right to do whatever they want. not like america. :)
saad6633 2 years ago
Quite the contrary many of the Ottoman Grand Viziers were christians
micah9639 2 years ago
I'm agree with you micah
I don't say there wasn't , I'm not even sure. But there must be.
Even when Arab invaded spain ( Alandlus)
in the next years there were christians and jews.
saad6633 2 years ago
Well jews are a given because the christian monarchs constantly persecuted or made life difficult for jewish people
micah9639 2 years ago
With respect for christians.
But, Ottman empire failed later because the previous plans of the migration to pelstain. And surely you know what happened next. ;)
saad6633 2 years ago
Empire falls because it joined a war that is shouldn't be concerned with they fail empire gets carved up into colonies yah?
micah9639 2 years ago
You're right, I'm and you seeing that she shoudn't.
But there is must a reason.
Even britian shouldn't enter that war.
but all of them have reasons.
which costed dividing the empire.
the Arabic world did alot of revolutions against the French and the british colonies, but the upshot was alot of kills.
I guess that you're interesting on history. ;)
saad6633 2 years ago
there were a large number of christians they used them has slaves for 1000 years for slave labor and soldiers
grandjedimaster09999 2 years ago
who?
saad6633 2 years ago
the ottomans and later the turks
grandjedimaster09999 2 years ago
The majority of officials of the Ottoman government were bought slaves.*
it was in the early, but years later, they forbidden it.
saad6633 2 years ago
yea cause they rebelled and they killed a large number of ottoman civilians
grandjedimaster09999 2 years ago
How could they?
if they did so. the ottman wouldn't stay that longer.
saad6633 2 years ago
ROME rulez
gitaarlove 2 years ago 2
try rome total realism!
jmdarcega 2 years ago
that is a big army
fartmovies100 2 years ago
ETW of course its fucking better graphics... are u a retard rome total war was out in like 2004
LachyHanzo 2 years ago
all the romans are super upgraded... totally unfair fight
mcdiddles123 2 years ago
this is not online you fucking retard
LachyHanzo 2 years ago
the one playing the romans has always more man if he tryed a normal player he would lose
bboybrolly12345 3 years ago
you can take carthage with elephants when romans doesn´t stand a chance
butterkeks1984 2 years ago
whoever is playing greek is a noob
mattfca 3 years ago
its the AI in the game not a player
006notbond 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
stop uploading these stupid videos......
soldier7799 3 years ago
y should he these videos were awsome
burnerofcrops 2 years ago
fucker
Whoeezit 2 years ago
which game is it ?
WeShallBeAsGods666 3 years ago
rome total war
Basking538 3 years ago
rome total war but if u think this is good get empire total war
1337ERIK1337 3 years ago
no man, that game is just bad.. i'm sticking to rome.
Jordiw00t 2 years ago
that's definitely better than Rome Total War
stiefel1992 2 years ago
it IS rome total war
gigioneumatica 2 years ago
ETW is better graphicly thought i cant say for the game play and campaign..
Vartex 2 years ago
i like all total wars, every one is unique... ^^
jonskislo1 2 years ago
wow mate u need to buck up ur computer its lagging like i never seen be4
Blakey478 3 years ago
it's the recording system that's lagging, not the computer.
RedHotGoku 3 years ago
If that is the worse lag you have ever seen, I want your computer.
sp10975 3 years ago
why did u put ur ballistas out in the open where they could get easily attacked?
TrumpetHero11 3 years ago
cause you can move them back if the enemy makes a move, this guy's just noob -_-;; besides, you usually place artillery in front so you can advance in front of them after they take a few shots.
NaslundFurever 3 years ago
And cavalry on any sort, would NEVER attack a phalanx head on as shown here. That would be suicide. Horses are dumb, but not that dumb. You can't make a horse, however well trained, throw itself onto a wall of spears. If you charged a phalanx at full gallop like that, the horses would stop short of the phalanx and the riders, whose saddles didn't even have stirrups would be thrown to the ground helpless in front of the hoplites. Dead meat.
gurumagoo 3 years ago
i have 2 points to make, 1 this is just a game, u take it too seriously and 2 you seem to like the romans, im really interested in them too, i always play as them in games like these
TheJoker434 3 years ago
I just think if a game of this sort is to be made it should be made right. I have played RTW and found it disapointing on many levels. There is a RTW realism modification called Europa Barbarorum, which is simply excellent. The units, their gear, movement, fighting techniques, etc, are as close to the real thing as I've ever seen. I don't understand why the original developers couldn't have done so well. Plain wrapper RTW is a joke compared to Europa Barbarorum. It's vastly superior.
gurumagoo 3 years ago
And yes, I do like the Romans. I admire the way the Romans approached many things, and their attitude toward the world. One word: Pragmatism. A small village on the banks of the Tiber that would one day rule the world. After two millenia, what they did is still stunning.
gurumagoo 3 years ago
Roman armies did not (if their consular commanders were wise) did not attempt to tackle a hoplite phalanx head on. That would be folly. Instead, they would attempt to envelop a phalanx and force it out of its linear style of "forwards/backwards" combat, and force it to fight along multi angles of defense where is would crumble and its formation would break down. The Roman manipular formation excelled at this.
gurumagoo 3 years ago 3
i just make a full army of hoplites and kill any other phalanx formations he he he
vampireknightvk 2 years ago
Try Europa Barbarorum mod for RTW. It's a realism mod with historically accurate weapons, armor, tactics, language, etc. Basically, it's what RTW should have been. It really changes the game ALOT. Hoplites for example don't fight in the pike phalanx but more as a shield wall. Romanophiles are in for a shock cause their in game bonuses don't exist. You have to fight as the romans using Roman tactics or you get STEAMROLLED by the Hellenistic hoplites and phalangites.
gurumagoo 2 years ago
i want the mod but don't get it how i start it when i installed :(
nelfzor 2 years ago
Go to the EB site. They have an extensive tech support forum. You need to completely remove all RTW files from your hard drive. Make a clean install of RTW. Patch it to 1.5, if your version is that already, install EB 1.1, then install the EB 1.2 patch over it. Then restart and run the EB validation program from the start menu. To run it you need Java. If you have Vista, make sure to install it OUTSIDE of program files.
gurumagoo 2 years ago
EB is buggy with Vista due to Vista's security and anti-piracy software. Installing EB outside of the program files directory solves a lot of these issues. Also run the program as administrator. Just right click over the icon and select run as admin.
gurumagoo 2 years ago
If your pc is XP, you should be fine otherwise.
gurumagoo 2 years ago
Dude, when romans really conquered Greece, their troops did it. Not tactics.
Roman troops were better, best in the world.
TheRoopeKonna 2 years ago
actually tactics are the key more so than their troops, if you look at all of their defeats, it was due to the enemy's superior tactics not troops.
1989dman 2 years ago 3
Like at Cannae
AquaPhoenix2006 2 years ago
Mmhm...but 1 million versus 100 (balanced individual troops), 1 million would probably win no matter what tactics the 100 used.
If it's outnumbered like 3 to 2, tactics play decisive roles. But outnumbered by 4 to 1 or something, tactics usually mean moot, and instead you focus on preserving your army with a skillful retreat or to cause as many casualties as possible, not winning. Of course it is possible (18 armoured elephants against thousands of peasants)
desertstryker1234 2 years ago
u know who qoncuerd it juli bruti or scippi?
gitaarlove 2 years ago
None of them. Brutii family in real weren't in war, and scipio's family's eyes were turned to sicily and africa. Julii too didn't do it, because that family weren't exist or weren't in war. Rome didn't conquer greece, they destroyed Macedon's empire of macedons greek provinces. Romans gived freedom for Greece. At Augustus imperium, Greece were claimed to rome's province .
TheRoopeKonna 2 years ago
not tactics? thats the most stupid thing i ever heard... when Roman Legions were facing the Macedonian Phalanx they "suprised" them beacuse the phalanx had a complicated way of formation it took a lot time for soldiers to get in possition.. anyway even so Macedons were winning but Romans pulled them to a "bad" shaped ground where the phalanx formation couldnt be used.. and so they won.. oh and dont forget "divide and conquer".
psypsynos 2 years ago 12
I meant the ground tactics, like "hammer and anvil". Of course romans had tactics, in larger formation. Their commanders weren't any kind of threat to enemy, but still there were some great ones, like Flaminius, who conquered Macedon, and Julius Caesar ect. They used theur ground tactics first time at Zama, so that is what i ment. I totally agree that, were the Romans pulled Macedonian phalanxes to lowground for the Macedonians. Sorry for that.
TheRoopeKonna 2 years ago
@psypsynos that is partially the truth... the truth is that IN BOTH BATTLES (which amazing!) the same thing happened: Macedonian heavy phalanx was winning against Roman legionaires while Macedonian light infantry was losing to Roman light infantry (actually allies from the rest of Greeks who were allied to Romans). It would be easy though for Macedonian army to give the final tap but the cavalry refused to enter in the most crucial moment and fled the battle.
Treason was the keyword.
papagamias 1 year ago
@papagamias Why treason from the cavalry? Well the cavalry was Macedonian aristocrats. And aristocrats opposed the last 2 kings of Macedonia as too populists. They wanted to go back to feudalism. Romans promised them that.
It is eye-popping that right after the Pydna battle, there were found 1000s of pro-Romans among Macedonians "who chased anti-Roman Macedonians and such"...
... in reality Romans had already won politically before the war. What happened in the battles was a minor detail.
papagamias 1 year ago
@papagamias In practice, the Romans never proved their military superiority over Macedonians or any other Greek. In fact, Roman tactics were only suitable for a vast army of the size of Romans (at 2nd B.C. century was already more than 300,000 when Greek armies were on average around 10,000 each, the army of Macedonian kings alltogether around 50,000).
When Romans of the 400 A.D. could not gather so many anymore, they changed the legion system altogether.
papagamias 1 year ago
There are a TON of different units and all sorts of construction restrictions (you can't conquer a new city and start building Urban Cohorts there). Expansion is slow and Roman armies require a lot of logistical support or else you have to depend on a lot of native troop types. VASTLY superior game.
gurumagoo 2 years ago
I liked EB... but it's not my dream mod. At first, all of the differences between the vanilla and the mod was so awesome. But the bad thing was that because the mod holds so much, each turn takes awfully long-maybe 1 minute or so-compared to the vanilla's 10 seconds. and also, i don't really like EB's terribly hard-to-grow economy. Denarii was better than Mnai. I found Makedon the most fun to play. The only thing I like about EB now is the 4-season year, 'stead of the 2-turn year.
jsjuno 2 years ago
Another problem with EB is that although the fact that now soldiers die much less frequently (an entire unit being routed in 10 seconds in the vanilla is just ridiculous), EB's "realistic" battles, featuring units that will fight for maybe 5 minutes or so, is sometimes too long. Another thing I love about EB is that the map is enlarged, to the Indus and the Arabian Peninsula. I wish RTW vanilla was made with the goods of EB, and the goods of itself.
Some things are best left "unrealistic"
jsjuno 2 years ago
Roman soldiers of both the Marian and Polybian forms were substancially superior to the Hellenic armies. Flexibility over rough ground and better organization allowed Romans troops a level of flexibility and maneuverability that the Hellenic hoplite just couldn't cope with. Toward the later Hellenic periord, the Greeks tried to adapt to the Romans by discarding the heavy armor and long spears in favor of fast troops that also carried missiles. Heavy peltasts for example.
gurumagoo 3 years ago
lets charge directly into the phalanxs formation !!
TallaFerro14 3 years ago
yea lets do it!
NaslundFurever 3 years ago
Ooooo pointy !!! ouch !!!
TallaFerro14 3 years ago
greeks pwn,always liked my hoplite army better
Erycantoaneta 3 years ago
the enemy king?? it said the enemy king has been killed.... what mode is this? It usually just says general...
Brianbays 3 years ago
if the leader of the faction is killed in battle that's what it says
TallaFerro14 3 years ago
greeks are awesome.
JamaicanMan18 3 years ago 4
how do you zoom in
saproductions9078 3 years ago
Attila u need to make these vids part of a playlist or something cause they're not in the "random rome total war" playlist i think.
blaisejones 3 years ago
just at the end when they were running it was just pure slaughter
killerbunnycompany 3 years ago
the romans can easely win against hoplites in falanx they just neet to get flanked and the falanx is broken
btw thats the macedonian falanx this one was first used in the army of alexander the great
yordi193 3 years ago
i have a really important question how do i record my gameplay in rome total war. im beegging everyone to help me because i cant use fraps.
ANTHONYJLOBOSCO 3 years ago
you have a battle and it saves the replay then u record the replay as its playing
daveisthebest01 3 years ago
I play with the western Romans.. I find them pretty well.... I like their cavalry.
LeonKakashi 3 years ago
Don't understand why someone is stupid enough to ram his cavalries head on into the front of a well-formed phalanx line.
stephentsang2000 3 years ago
lol the com is retarded or attila had it on easy mode
lone2k8 3 years ago
Egyptians are the easiest to play. But I have Bruit is the best roman faction to play.
dgardine1 3 years ago
all the romans have the same units pretty much except for the gladiators
vedran156 3 years ago
if you play the greek fraction, the oder fractions have no chance to beat your hoplites!
kloaneKantn 3 years ago
what about the other phalanx factions ie macedonians selucids thracians carthaginians egyptians (sort of pontus and germany) or any faction that uses tactics well
duncan01234 3 years ago
romans can hack there there through a phalanx pretty well.
GeneralBelesarius 3 years ago
so how win? did we win?
Bro474747 3 years ago
You're good, good strategy
othmirocker 3 years ago
why do almost everybody likes to see roman lose and get owned and fight them you know they were a great and noble empire. plus when they falled all of europe went in hell
goku9102 3 years ago
Cuz the game's biased towards the romans.
RTWXilef 3 years ago
True, but then again it is called "ROME - Total War". If you want a non-roman based game play one of the mods.
uncurable1 3 years ago
Exactly you can play the expansion packs as well. In BI the romans suck
RTWXilef 3 years ago
Yeah they do!
uncurable1 3 years ago
no they dont! lol so powa arguments
argonald 3 years ago
Have u seen the position the Western Roman Empire is at the start of the game?
They got literally no money, a small crap army and lots of rebellions and barbarian enemies. (The Eastern Roman Empire is in a better position but they have to deal with the friggin sassinids
RTWXilef 3 years ago
nope i havent played with em,only custom battles and i didnt know this stuff :D
argonald 3 years ago
Well there we have it :D
The Romans on BI is a very good challenge though
RTWXilef 3 years ago
the eastern empire is easy to play as and has a great army the western army isnt bad from a battle point of view just a campign point of view
duncan01234 3 years ago
Phalanx formation only good when used as a defence angainst oncoming infantry & cavalry directly at you otherwise just cumbersome and vunreble
fixdeluxe1 3 years ago
nah u must know how to gain the field with em
argonald 3 years ago
how do u recruit 160 men in a unit instead of the normal 80? im dying to know!!!!
reversethecurse2004 3 years ago
go to the game options, click the box that says 'more options' or something like that, then you have an option to change unit size from 'normal' to 'huge'
watfordbean 3 years ago
Thanks Dude!!!
reversethecurse2004 3 years ago
multiplayer or: go to the game options, click the box that says 'more options' or something like that, then you have an option to change unit size from 'normal' to 'huge''.
icedshit339 3 years ago
oh and btw i play on very hard :) can u tell me pliz how to play online ? cuz when i enter on multiplayer and click host or those thingies says something like invalid cd key :-??
tudorRO93 3 years ago
that means somebody somhow cracked your cd key you enterd it wrong or you registerd the game on some other coputer or hard drive good luck!
wowrabbit13 3 years ago
btw those are scipi ? i hate them ... i think they have a bad position .... and the juli are btter ..u start with some archers and triari ....
tudorRO93 3 years ago
cool battle attila u are a great player :D i just started campaign with greece .... mane i pwn the romans !!!! oh the seleucids and macedonians too
tudorRO93 3 years ago
Heh. You're lucky you outnumbered them. Had they outnumbered you or had more cavalry chances are they would've put you into the ground.
Cordman1221 3 years ago
why do u have mercenary hoplites for rome!?!?!?!?!
i thought this was only rome vs greece?
Blueguy85 3 years ago 2
aaaaaa
edwardhansen 3 years ago