The Historical Accuracy of History Great Empires Rome.

[Yaakov001]

Hey, everyone. Just thought I'd put in my two (American) cents. I have a Master's Degree in History, and of course studied some Roman History getting it. About two and a half to three years ago I picked up the game title for the NDS mentioned in the subject line. The guy at GameStop evidently had not played it because he indicated that I would beat it in a few hours.

Well, I brought this beauty home, popped it in the DS and promply got STOMPED! And stomped. And stomped. Wash, rinse, repeat... For two and one-half years I got STOMPED.

Why was this happening? I'm normally good at games like this, you know, like Civilization Revolution DS, and such-like. It simplly made no sense that a strat game set on Easy should do this to me.

One day I was reading a college text on the History of Rome, by Tenney Frank, copyright 1923. He was well respected in his day. Anyway, I was reading about the Roman conquest and unification of Italy.

I decided to relax and on a whim, broke out the DS and tried the Italian campaign playing the Romans, historical setting, Easy level. I had always played in England before.

As I played, I began to notice how accurate the maps were. As I thought about what I had read in Frank's book, I began to realise that the game was playing exactly as the history did. For example, feeding the City of Rome was never easy, and neither is it here. Other cities have their own troubles.

I began to realise that the people who made this game knew A LOT about Roman History, and brought as much of it to the game as they could. THAT is why I had been getting stomped. In Civ Rev DS, you make your own history. In this game (Great Empires Rome) you play according to the broad dictates of history.

Its basically just a port of Legion Gold to the DS in many ways. And I know a lot of DS gamers didn't like it. I think that is because the learning curve on the game is too high for most DS players, who are young persons. And even adults using a DS don't expect strat games originally designed for a computer.

I discovered that, playing the Romans trying to unite Italy in the historic setting, if I think like an Ancient Roman, I can possibly win. Well, I started with two or three cities, and now have fourteen.

But the accuracy amazes me. They had some brilliant minds there. I mean, they even got it right as to which cities produce more of one resource than another.

I know most Americans didn't take to the game. Americans are dumb that way. They usually do NOT like strats on the DS.

And the attention to history details is just like, WOW! How many troops can a city make, feed, garrisoned, or active? How much food v. metal v. wood does a city produce?l And the game knows this all. Given that, you have to know what a city should be producing in order to optimise national strength.

Ultimately, this is a game such that it deserves the highest accolades. I would explain gameplay. But I'm exhausted and need sleep. But to be able to BE an Emperor out of my pocket, that is just awesome. If anyone wants to know more, post here or PM me.

There is one weakness to the game, viz, its save feature , which can only hold ONE game at a time. I reesoved cthis problem yesterday by buying a second copy of the game card. Normally I would not own two of a game. But being able to hold two games in Save is good. I might even buy a third in order to have the standard Three Save function. But two will do for the moment.

[IainMcNeil]

Thanks very much for the comments. It was our first game as Slitherine and e did a lot of research to get it feeling right. There are lot of things that are abstracted or simplified but we did work hard to get the map, tribes and setting all realistic.

We made 3 more games in that series, so check out Chariots of War, Spartan and gates of Troy if you like it. They each cover different parts of ancient history in a similar way.

[Yaakov001]

How can I get hold of these others? Were they made for the DS? Incidentally, to my non-admin readers, I am guessing the reason for only being able to hold one game in Save was due to memory issues. Ian, would that be anywhere near accurate?

[Yaakov001]

I looked that up, and they were made for the PC. I don't have one at the moment. Mine crashed. I am using a tablet for my computer needs. Can the games be adapted to that?

[Yaakov001]

And another question, since I've got you here. I am a university professor (adjunct) and I am writing a book that I hope will be published and used as a textbook in the history of the Holy Roman Empire (viz, Medieval Germany). But to fully talk about the history of the HOLY Roman Empire of the German Nation, I have to talk about Rome itself, and how it came to exercise such control over the minds of men in Europe such that they sought to preserve it, at least in name, for 1500 years after its fall.

Whilst reading Tenney Frank, and then playing your game, I was given a whole new understanding of Rome and its background. It made me appreciate the Empire in ways I never had before. I would like to include the game in my Works Cited list. It would not be in the Footnotes, because I am not getting a direct quote or piece of information out of it. But it would go in the Works Cited (basically a Bibliography, but with more information) list as having contributed to the book in a broad, general sense, of giving good general information. It may be the first time a video game has ever been used in the writing of a history textbook!

Ordinarily, of course, one doesn't tell someone that their "stuff", for lack of a better word, is being used in a paper or book, primarily because one never meets the author or creator of the "stuff". But this is an extraordinary case. I am actually talking to the people that made the game that helped so much.

And I am not exaggerating. The game really pushed my writing in ways that would not have happened otherwise. And I think it would really NOT be cool to not credit it. What do you think?

[Yaakov001]

There is ONE way the game could perhaps have been improved upon, and that is the battle sequences. As everyone here knows, once you press go, then you've got no control, and one side or other WILL be slaughtered, and you had better just pray that its them!

And sometimes the AI will make YOUR army do something really horrible, like turn and run when it should stand, or the opposite of that, or what-have-you. And man, when you do lose a battle, sometimes the results can be catastrophic.

Out of curiosity, was the whole battle thing being set to automatic also a function of memory limitations? Taking a city can be a real bear also. My G-d, how well defended can one freakin' city be?!

Well, nevertheless, still a great game. Just thought to point out the one weakness it does have.