07-27-2003, 12:57 PM
Strategy wrote;<br>
<br>
"My problem with the archers is not the presence of archers as such (though certain cultures - e.g., the Roman - had no use of archers in war); it's more that since RTS games always exaggerate the effect of missile fire, archery is going to play a completely unhistorical role in the game."<br>
<br>
Admittedly, I am not familiar w/ any RTS games outside of the TW series as I loathe the genre. That being said I can state that in the TW series archers are not at all decisive. Sure they will take their toll on units that just stand there and "take it" but that's about it - and I would expect no change in the Rome iteration.<br>
<br>
"Which means we will see Roman archers? Groan."<br>
<br>
Not necessarily as the Roman's did not raise units of archer's but relied on auxilliary units for this purpose. I agree that a "Roman" archer unit would be lame -but a Syrian archer unit employed by the Roman's would be fine.<br>
<br>
Barkhorn.<br>
<p></p><i></i>
<br>
"My problem with the archers is not the presence of archers as such (though certain cultures - e.g., the Roman - had no use of archers in war); it's more that since RTS games always exaggerate the effect of missile fire, archery is going to play a completely unhistorical role in the game."<br>
<br>
Admittedly, I am not familiar w/ any RTS games outside of the TW series as I loathe the genre. That being said I can state that in the TW series archers are not at all decisive. Sure they will take their toll on units that just stand there and "take it" but that's about it - and I would expect no change in the Rome iteration.<br>
<br>
"Which means we will see Roman archers? Groan."<br>
<br>
Not necessarily as the Roman's did not raise units of archer's but relied on auxilliary units for this purpose. I agree that a "Roman" archer unit would be lame -but a Syrian archer unit employed by the Roman's would be fine.<br>
<br>
Barkhorn.<br>
<p></p><i></i>
