Re:Lovely, but... (Score 1)

Nice summary, but I think you (and most other smart reviewers, btw) are still forgetting about the most important thing: Imagine an omniscient God commanding an ancient army. That's just your role in the Total War series.

You have instant communications with all your units. Want your phalanx formation to make a 180Â turn? Give the order, the men will start turning within the second, and be done with it shortly afterwards. In reality, maneuvering large formations was a terribly difficult task, and much training (throughout all stages of military history) had to be invested in such basic skills.

In the Total War series, your elite units will have more "hitpoints" and deal out more damage. But even the dumbest peasant horde obeys your orders within seconds, like a perfect shoal. No comparison to "real peasant armies" who allowed for little more commanding finesse than unleashing them for a frontal assault.

I can see the next Total War release will have awesome-looking battles, epic and all, but they won't change the general aracde-ish concept that appeals to the masses. Actual bayonet fighting rarely occured because it was all about which side would find the courage to charge and which would lose heart first? The hell with it, we want full-scale melee on a regular basis with thousands of men stabbing each other to death.. If real battles were as bloody as depicted in Total War, people would have abolished war alltogether. :P

Okay it will be a fun game, but I am still waiting for the game that aims for the real feeling of being a historic commander.