Hardcore PC strategy gamers fondly remember Medieval: Total War as one of the best strategy titles of the past decade. Expectations are high for the sequel: gamers are hoping Rome: Total War will be a shimmering golden God of strategy gaming, a new benchmark by which all other games are judged. Is it? Not quite -- there are still some rough spots on the Appian Way. But Rome is nonetheless a stunning title, a worthy addition to the franchise and a must-have if you're into strategy gaming.
If you're unfamiliar with the Total War franchise, here's the hook: these games mix a turn-based empire-building game with a stunning real-time battle engine. The turn-based game is as rich and as deep as Civilization, and the real-time game is so good-looking and realistic that the History Channel now has a television program based around it. Put the two games together and something special happens: your grand strategic decisions impact the battles you'll fight, and the battles have a new sense of importance because of their ramifications on the big picture. Two great games come together to form Total War. Or, as the case may be, a Totally Good Time.
Rome brings the combat to the ancient Mediterranean, and it takes the franchise to the next level in a couple of important ways. As before, thousands of individual troops will be rendered on the screen during a battle, but this time they're rendered in full 3D with realistic period equipment. You're no longer detached from the action: you can really zoom down in there and see guys fighting tooth and nail. Also, the two halves of the game are more integrated than ever. Instead of feeling like a flat board game map, the grand strategic game is also played out in 3D, with the camera zooming right in whenever a battle takes place. The position of the troops among the terrain when you start a battle is more important than ever. These additions really take the franchise to the next level for fans, and should dazzle new players with the depth of the Total War experience.
Grand Strategy
Like all great strategy games, Rome has a complex underlying simulation but it's very simple to access and interact with. The interface is streamlined. You can drill down to get very in-depth information about your family or what's going on in individual cities, or you can just sit back and push your troops around bullying the barbarians.
The grand strategic game is a careful balancing act of priorities. Do you develop your cities financially, or concentrate on buildings that will crank out more troops? Will you try to negotiate for an expensive alliance or will you use the money to hire mercenaries and risk taking on two factions at once? Every turn throws interesting decisions your way.
A great example of this can be found with your "named characters," important family members in your faction who you can move around the map. Cities are capable of running themselves, but when you do that you can't specify which exact buildings to build or which troops to recruit. To do that, you need to have a named character in place as governor. Some of your leaders are great generals, others are good governors, others have more influence in the Senate -- it's up to you to figure out how best to use them. Do you keep them at home, making sure that all your cities are running smoothly without chance of revolt? Or do you send them out into the field, where they can conquer new territory from you and gain battle experience or glory for your faction? If you expand too fast, you won't have enough trusted people to run your important cities. Worse, one of your most important faction leaders could be killed in action. Decisions, decisions!