I think its one of the most historically accurate games ever. As long as the intention is there, and is overall trying to match. For me the difference between historically accurate and fantasy, is the essence. If im playing a medieval game, and suddenly i see some magic or dragon stuff that will break the immersion. But overall simple details that are not historically accurate are sometimes a plus. For example a special formation that never existed. Or huge numbers and never ending armies.
Want to make the game historically accurate? 1) Break the symmetry. It makes zero sense for equal sized units for every civ. 2) formations should only be available to elite troops and mercs. Lower ranked troops should be large numbered hordes. 3) cost of troops should be greater or lesser in campaign depending on your economy. Bigger empires should field elite armies more easily than small struggling kingdoms. 4) lower tier troops should not be as responsive as elite troops. Like real life, their responsiveness to orders and pathfinding in formation should be objectively worse. 5) once a territory is captured in campaign, it should not be an inevitable and uniform process of making it a part of your empire. Province management should be extremely unpredictable. But also, rebel armies should have zero elite units. 6) every civ should have their equivalent of tje marian reforms. If we deal with alternate history like we do in the game, we have to ask questions like 'how would the greeks and barbarians be influenced if they fought each other.' 7) map conquest shoild be prohibitively expensive and nearly-impossible.
Nope it s not clearly accurate. The flank attack are not so lethal one time I flank an Macedonian phalanx and they still beat me.There is no decisive battle you have to destroy every city of faction this is a waste of time.
Very true. The AI rarely sues for peace after a particularly harsh defeat. And even if they need negotiating isn't that great in this game. You can't even demand cities.
@@WolfOfIberia the macedonian phalanx are clearly inaccurate too. They are so fast and they even can change directions in the misdt of the battle. It was a shock for me when I fought them the first time.There is no clearly way to fight against the elephants
@@sebastienraymond9534 Well the pigs were actually used a few times with success against elephant formations. The dogs, I'm not sure never heard of dogs being used in battle.
@@gertoise It really doesn't. I've played it quite a bit. All map inaccuracies are still there, battles are somewhat better but still very inaccurate. The units are way better in DEI. On the campaign the supply and pop features give it some more authenticity but it's still quite inaccurate. Overall it's fine it's a game and I think it has a good balance between historical authenticity/accuracy and gameplay. DEI improves on it 100%
@@WolfOfIberia Hopefully now that we know we can get map tools the DEI devs will eventually be able to fix the map as well. It'll take some time but it'll happen.
The battles are not very historically accurate in my opinion. Whenever I play against the computer, instead of the computer fighting traditionally and head on like how they did in real life, they send different units all over the place. It's so chaotic and confusing, and it's obviously not how they fought back then. The computer should fight you head on and traditionally, that would be much more historically accurate.
Agreed. Tough it should be optional as some people preffer the more chaotic play style. I for one also would love if the battle were more historically accurate.
In general is ok but some units specialy barbarians elite units like oathsworn in my opinion is op. They need some small nerf , also i understand is a balance for spears not beat all units…..but swords vs spears in reality are not better. In general the game is very good.
@@WolfOfIberia Hahahahah now that's a unit that truly deserves the title of OP. Nothing like them in Total War until we got single entity units in Warhammer !
@@crmesson22k Yeah. I'm sure that most inaccuracies in the main campaign are due to game engine and time limitations. And also important to keep gameplay accessible. In the DLCs the limited scope allows for more accurate depictions of the time! HatG is great. Wrath of Sparta is also quite interesting. And in Ceasar in Gaul there are also more tribes!
Do you feel that this game should've been more historically accurate?
I think its one of the most historically accurate games ever.
As long as the intention is there, and is overall trying to match.
For me the difference between historically accurate and fantasy, is the essence.
If im playing a medieval game, and suddenly i see some magic or dragon stuff that will break the immersion.
But overall simple details that are not historically accurate are sometimes a plus.
For example a special formation that never existed. Or huge numbers and never ending armies.
Agreed. I don't mind that the game isn't super accurate or realistic. As long as the atmosphere and what you can see is accurate.
My question is... why are you such a underrated youtuber????? Great video! Subbed!
Euehe thanks! Really appreciate it!
Want to make the game historically accurate?
1) Break the symmetry. It makes zero sense for equal sized units for every civ.
2) formations should only be available to elite troops and mercs. Lower ranked troops should be large numbered hordes.
3) cost of troops should be greater or lesser in campaign depending on your economy. Bigger empires should field elite armies more easily than small struggling kingdoms.
4) lower tier troops should not be as responsive as elite troops. Like real life, their responsiveness to orders and pathfinding in formation should be objectively worse.
5) once a territory is captured in campaign, it should not be an inevitable and uniform process of making it a part of your empire. Province management should be extremely unpredictable. But also, rebel armies should have zero elite units.
6) every civ should have their equivalent of tje marian reforms. If we deal with alternate history like we do in the game, we have to ask questions like 'how would the greeks and barbarians be influenced if they fought each other.'
7) map conquest shoild be prohibitively expensive and nearly-impossible.
Nope it s not clearly accurate. The flank attack are not so lethal one time I flank an Macedonian phalanx and they still beat me.There is no decisive battle you have to destroy every city of faction this is a waste of time.
Very true. The AI rarely sues for peace after a particularly harsh defeat. And even if they need negotiating isn't that great in this game. You can't even demand cities.
@@WolfOfIberia the macedonian phalanx are clearly inaccurate too. They are so fast and they even can change directions in the misdt of the battle. It was a shock for me when I fought them the first time.There is no clearly way to fight against the elephants
@@sebastienraymond9534 also agreed. I think it has to do with the animations. Regardless it is a good point.
@@WolfOfIberia don't forget there is a lot of useless units. Dog and pig ? For God sake what am going to do with a bunch of pig.
@@sebastienraymond9534 Well the pigs were actually used a few times with success against elephant formations. The dogs, I'm not sure never heard of dogs being used in battle.
Great video! I'd like to see a similar video on Imperator Rome or Crusader Kings 3!
I find both to be more authentic and accurate! But there are no battles :(
Good content ! your channel will definitely grow, give it time and keep up the great job. 👍
Thanks man! Hope to live up to that :D
No but DEI is :P
Remember EB for Rome 1? They were amazing
@@gertoise It really doesn't. I've played it quite a bit. All map inaccuracies are still there, battles are somewhat better but still very inaccurate. The units are way better in DEI. On the campaign the supply and pop features give it some more authenticity but it's still quite inaccurate. Overall it's fine it's a game and I think it has a good balance between historical authenticity/accuracy and gameplay. DEI improves on it 100%
@@WolfOfIberia Hopefully now that we know we can get map tools the DEI devs will eventually be able to fix the map as well.
It'll take some time but it'll happen.
@@Sephyroth97 Absolutely. It'll be a ton of work. But if they do it, I'll be here to praise the heck out of that team.
The battles are not very historically accurate in my opinion. Whenever I play against the computer, instead of the computer fighting traditionally and head on like how they did in real life, they send different units all over the place. It's so chaotic and confusing, and it's obviously not how they fought back then. The computer should fight you head on and traditionally, that would be much more historically accurate.
Agreed. Tough it should be optional as some people preffer the more chaotic play style. I for one also would love if the battle were more historically accurate.
In general is ok but some units specialy barbarians elite units like oathsworn in my opinion is op. They need some small nerf , also i understand is a balance for spears not beat all units…..but swords vs spears in reality are not better. In general the game is very good.
It can only be truly considered Historical if it includes incendiary pigs !!! 🤣🤣That's the true test.
And rampaging berserkeeerssss
@@WolfOfIberia Hahahahah now that's a unit that truly deserves the title of OP.
Nothing like them in Total War until we got single entity units in Warhammer !
@@IceniTotalWar oh yeah! That should tell ya something. And berserker weren't all that inaccurate either!
1:25 The Etruscans were fully conquered by 272 BC so Etruscan Italy should be rome and alalia carthage
Not quite. It was in 262 BCE that Velzna, the last Etruscan city, was finally conquered by the Romans.
Bet CA didnt enjoy the video.
Absolutely love it 😍
I think the stand-alone dlc campaigns do a better job of Depicting a historical map.
Yeah because the map can have a lot more detail :D Absolutely!
@Wolf Of Iberia like in the hanabbil campaign Rome is more broken up in to the way you were talking about in the video.
@@crmesson22k Yeah. I'm sure that most inaccuracies in the main campaign are due to game engine and time limitations. And also important to keep gameplay accessible.
In the DLCs the limited scope allows for more accurate depictions of the time! HatG is great. Wrath of Sparta is also quite interesting. And in Ceasar in Gaul there are also more tribes!
MAGNA GREKIA? Man i confirm you researched well, but please, even the pronounciation of the namings has to be correctly researched. :D
Guilty! :(