"; if(is_file("header.php")) include "header.php"; else include "../header.php"; ?>

A Unique Genre unto Itself, Superior to Classical RTS Games I have been been playing complex strategy board games by Avalon Hill and other companies since the mid-1970's and I have been playing real-time strategy games since "Dune II" in the early 1990's, which was the very first real-time strategy game ever released. The terminology "real-time strategy" did not exist at that time -- it was simply DIFFERENT than any other game out there, a unique genre unto itself. The nomenclature "RTS" was coined only after numerous other game designers started copying (and improving on) the basic gameplay elements introduced by Dune II. For many years I have considered real-time strategy games to be my favorite type of game. I must emphatically state that "Rome: Total War" is not a real-time strategy game. It is absolutely a completely unique genre unto itself, just as Dune II was in it's day. Real time strategy games involve simultaneously collecting resources with a few specialized units at key locations on the map, building structures which sprout from the ground like a rose blooming in a fast-motion video, purchasing research capabilities for new technologies which become available a few seconds later, training military units in seconds flat, and engaging a small number of units in a primitive arcade representation of what might be considered combat; they generally possess only a minimal sense of realism. "Rome: Total War" is nothing like that. "Rome: Total War" is a hybrid game, in that the strategic side the game is turn-based (not real-time) and is played on a large, complex map of Europe, the Middle East, and northern Africa, dominated by the Mediterranean Sea -- the center of Western culture in Roman times. The only "resource gathering" that occurs during this turn-based portion of the game is establishing an internal trade economy, establishing trade routes with other factions for imports and exports, establishing taxation policies, buying and selling privileges and information with other factions, and investing in agricultural improvements to accumulate the one and only resource that actually is needed in warfare -- money. After earning money in such a practical and realistic manner, it can be invested in improving the educational, spiritual, military, and economic facilities in individual territories. Each territory has different strengths and weaknesses -- because of the fertility of the land, available trade goods, the presence or absence of a coastline for naval trade, etc. Therefore, each territory should be developed differently, to captitalize on its strengths. Of course, another way to obtain money is to conquer a territory and assume management of it. In order to do this, funds can be invested in the production of different types of military units which can be used to conquer or defend territories. Certainly none of this bears any resemblence to sending food-gatherers to pumpkin patches ("Empire Earth") scattered around the map, or driving around in a hovertank to pick up alien "scrap" ("Battlezone"), or any of the other unrealistic resource-gathering devices inherent in the myriad of real-time strategy games on the market. Approaches like these are merely mimicking reality in a microcosmic way in order to adhere to the gameplay paradigm of the real-time strategy model. After declaring all of your movements, negotiations and expenditures for a six month period (the duration indicated by one turn of gameplay), within the constraints of the funds available in your treasury, you indicate that you are ending that turn. (There are also subterfuge and diplomatic elements but that is beyond the scope of this review.) Military engagements may be resolved automatically by the computer (by calculating the odds and "rolling the dice" as in traditional strategic board games) or the player may use the "battle simulator" to direct the combat himself. In this mode, he is essentially playing the role of the top General, overseeing the battle from a height and issuing orders to his troops. Although the "battle simulator" is certainly realtime, there is no resource gathering and there are no strategic elements whatsover. It is strictly a TACTICAL (not STRATEGIC) simulation in which the player makes the decisions for each of his battalions. Rather than relying on the "paper-rock-scissors" philosophy so commonly found in RTS games, the "battle simulator" strives for absolute realism in all respects, taking into consideration hundreds of different factors such as the terrain, weather, encumbrance and stamina, unit and leadership experience, formation and facing, arms and armor, individual morale factors which can be influenced by each unit's perception of the tide of the battle in it's immediate vicinity or by shock of loud noises or a rain of fiery arrows or the encouraging sight of his own general fighting beside him, and about a million other little things. The player also tries to take these things into consideration when issuing orders to his troops. The outcome of a battle is not determined by killing each and every adversary, as in most real-time strategy games; if the enemy can be routed from a territory, then you are the victor. It is quite possible to hit a stronger army with ambush or shock tactics and chase them fleeing from the battlefield, in which case they will surely take heavy casualties because of their vulnerability to attack from the rear during their flight. This leaves you in control of the territory, but the enemy units that escaped will have a chance to regroup and assault at a later time. In all respects, the "battle simulator" attempts to model realism. The rules of the game are the same rules that we encounter in the real world, rather than the oversimplified and often nonsensical rules that are typically found in real-time strategy games. This portion of "Rome: Total War" is a true "battle simulator" in much the same way as a good flight simulator -- as if you're actually in the cockpit of the REAL airplane or fighter jet of your choice, flying over REAL maps of REAL parts of our planet. By comparision, real-time strategy games are about as realistic as a "spaceflight simulator" in which the only thing you need to use for a successful landing of the Lunar Lander is a joystick. Get the picture? So, "Rome: Total War" is not a real-time strategy game. For some reason it is often compared to real-time strategy games. I suppose that's because there is really no other type of game to compare it to, since it is indeed a unique genre unto itself. Someday, I suppose, we will have a name for this type of game. The best way I can describe it right now is a hybrid between a turn-based strategy game and a large-scale battle simulator. Whatever you want to call it, you won't be wrong if you call it the best game you've ever played, and the most impressive in scope and magnitude. It also has almost infinite replay value. Buy it. You won't be disappointed.