The "Greek Cities" operating as a centrally-ruled empire is super inaccurate.

Top Unhistorical faction - Rebels, goddamnit

I swear to god you only made this video to use that thumbnail on a video

Most historically inaccurate faction in total war: whichever one the player controls.

Ah yes The famous MG-42 legionaries, the greatest unit of the Roman army

for me the most unhistorical faction is skaven,they dont exist its an urban legend chanted by heretics, i mean zombie pirates riding undead crabs is fine but that "skaven" bullshit is just to much

I dont see anything unhistorical about the thumbnail

As a portuguese, when I played Medieval 2 I straight up laughed when I saw both Portugal existing on 1080 as well as freakin Spain instead of Castille or Leon. I know most people don't care about us, but atleast fuckin' try.

1. Warriors of Chaos 2. Vampire Courts 3. High Elves 4. Dark elves 5. Dwarves

Top 5 annoying total war factions to fight against.

Hattori never existed as a clan in actual Sengoku history, add that.

The Numidian legionaries are actually excellent examples of “imitation legions” that cropped up across the Mediterranean world during the mid to late Roman era. Top Five Wierdest Units maybe? Things that just seem out of place in the roster for the faction or just look funky

Top 5 hardest factions to Conquer.

Actually, the Julii, Brutii, Scipii and SPQR factions in RTW were quite unhistoric. Roman Republic shouldn’t be territorially partitioned along family lines.

What is also very unhistoric about Russia in Medieval II ist that the design of the units is designated to be asociated with 17th century Russia. This comes very clear if you look at thet Tsar guard and several Cossack units while Cossacks did exist until at least the begin of the 16th century.

I think Scotland should be mentioned for all the tartan that is worn by the units, tartan wasn't worn in Scotland until the 1600s (correct me if I'm wrong) the units were clearly influenced by the famously historically accurate Bravehart

I love the thumbnail

Scotland in M2TW, its basically Braveheart.

No one's going to mention the Inuit Nation from Empire Total War?

The reason why you have these anachronistic titles for Russia, Spain, Portugal etc. is because the games are retrospective. They tell the story of how those countries came to be and view their historical predecessor as that faction itself. Reading the Russian campaign lore, it turns out the faction that you are playing is actually the Kievan Rus, whose Grand Prince went to Novgorod to gather his armies in safety so he can march back down to Kiev and consolidate power versus his political rivals; hence why the city is owned by Rebels in his absence. Of course the reason the factions are like this is because the devs either didn't design it properly, couldn't because of technological limitations or just didn't bother.

Top 5 best looking units

Top 5 best total war conversion mods. (IE:. SS6.4 or Third Age or Steel Faith overhaul. Those kind of mods.)

Top Unhistorical Faction: Western Roman Empire, Total War Attila. Reason: It's possible to win the game while playing as them. >:)

Medieval II has the most unhistorical factions : Moors didnt exist in 1080, Andalusia was dominated by Taifas. Portugal and Spain didn't exist too. Milan and Genoa were part of the HRE, as well as Flanders and many rebels settlements. Seljuk turks should own Baghdad and Syria as they did in 1080. Egypt owned Jerusalem and Mecca but lost them to Turks. Russia of course should not be in Novgorod but in Kiev and should be called Rus of Kiev. Venice in Crete in 1080 ? Alexios Komemnos would never have allowed that. Shogun 2 is also wrong on the campaign starting locations like : Date didn't control Iwate before end of 16th century, Ikko ikki didn't control Echizen, they were near Kyoto and Osaka and also had forts in Mikkawa that Ieyasu had to fight, Miyoshi were the actual regent of the shogunate but in game they are not major. Hattori never ruled Iga. Ninja clans lived in the area but they were not Daimyo or Bugyo. This clan in game is purely fictional although Hattori Hanzo was a retainer of Ieyatsu who used ninjas a lot (and they had more than 2 ammunitions, right CA?) Imagawa should have been a major faction, they were the first to "go for Kyoto". Otomo were not the only christians samurais, many central Japan's daimyo converted. Sorin was a buddhist monk and converted later, in game his family starts christian. Oda should be the master of gunpowder since it was Nobunaga who used it the best. Actually he created his own religion with a mix of Christianity and bouddhism where HE was the living God. Tokugawa should not even exist at start date. They were the Matsudaira and didnt even control all of Mikkawa just like it took Oda Nobuhide all his life to unite only Owari province !

The Ebdanians literally didn’t exist. The name Ebdanoi was a clerical error of Eblani, who are themselves only referenced in a Geography writing from a couple centuries before Attila is set. They were never the overlords of Ireland and had probably ceased to exist by that point. Their unique late game units (Kerns, Gallowglas, Mormaer) are all from the medieval period, at least half a millennia after Attila’s start. Fianna were basically the Irish Knights of the Round Table, the stories of the former probably inspired/influenced the stories of the latter in fact. Granted, much like Arthurian legend, the surviving writings of the Fianna are medieval, but the story is set in a time that was relatively close to, or possibly even contemporary with the events of Attila and the stories themselves may have originated, possibly inspired by reality, at that time as well.

Top 5 Most OP regions.

If #1 isn't Egypt from Rome 1 then you're fired

honorable mention. Amazons (Rebels) at the top of the map of Rome Total war

Top 5 or 10 most useful buildings in any Total War

In Rome : Total War, every faction is unhistorical. Spain, Gaul, Germany,Scythia, Numidia, Greece, Britannia... In Medieval II: Turkey is súper unhistorical. It sould have been divided in two factions. I always thought MII:TW needed: Kiev, Armenia, Rum Turks, Abassid Turks, and Aragon. Would have made the Eastern, Middle Eastern, and Iberian campains a loooot better.

Ah, Ptolemaic Egypt in Total war : Rome They appears like the Old Kingdom Egypt, yet their tactics and AI somehow like Mamluks egypt

"This is supposed to be about total war" that's high level passion right there lots of respect to you

The numidian roman style unit may be related to a rebellion during imperial era (Augustus-Tiberius). This rebel, Tacfarinas, used to be a roman official, and the sources claim that he trained his men to fight "in formation", in a "roman style", not as the nomad armies and rebels usually fought. Obviously they were not Numidian legionaries as depicted. Maybe this is where the idea come from, although is terribly executed by CA in game if so.

How about Aztecs in Medieval2? Where they design siege towers and rams on wheels?

In Medieval 2 and Rome 1, the number of factions were very limited. You can only have a set number of factions total, so thats why they condensed a lot of the city states factions into larger ones, like "Russia, Spain, Germania, Gaul, etc." Evidence of this is the rebels faction that represents all the other cultures that are not playable. There's also Stainless Steel, which has to sacrifice the Aztecs so that new factions can be brought into the game. The other reason for these historical innacuracies are twofold: one, to be instantly familiar to people who do not know history that well (like the "Mummy Returns" Egypt, Braveheart Scotland, etc.), so they played with the tropes and stereotypes from movies to draw people in. Besides that, there's the campaign balance factor. I remember hearing some developer saying that Spain was left as it is in ME2 because, otherwise, its AI would stand no chance against moors and french (at that time, they didnt want factions to be "initial challenge hard/easy/medium"). The division of Rome into the 3 families was to represent the civil wars that plagued the empire, that was the best they could do with that old engine.

I think Scotland (m2tw) should belong on this list. The entire faction was clearely based around the movie Braveheart (facepaints, kilts etc) when in reality, there armies looked quite similar to the English.

I can't believe you didn't put Westphalia from empire total war. There was no such a state ever and especially not in the 1700s. Under napoleons rule was a kingdom of Westphalia, but it didn't exist in the area were it was in empire. I think it's the most unhistorrical state because it never existed. Even today Westphalia is not an own state of Germany

Fake news... Skavens are the most Unhistorical, as if giant ratmen would exists...

This video just makes me want Medieval 3 so much more. With the structure of power in Europe at the time, very few factions actually resemble the kingdoms and fiefdoms that they are supposed to at the start date and later .

most unhistorical thing in Total War for me Gladiators as units (facepalm)

They could have called Russia Kievian Rus also, would have made more sense

I LOVE that picture of those grinning Legionaires manning their MG 42. No wonder Caeser Kicked Gaul's ass, no matter how many millions of them. Remember the Gallic use of cavalry against Panzers, that did not go well either!! Why did they not learn from the Polish??? On the other hand Hitler never learned from Napoleon and 1812 so there is that!

"I have done as much research as I'm willing to do for this video". That quote made me subscribe. You seem honest and genuine. Respect! :)

DUDE, THE AMAZONS Somewhere in the north of Russia in Rome:TW lies Themyscira, with the Amazons (barbarians) guarding it. Talk about Unhistorical XD

In medieval 2 Amercias campaign, none of the northern native factions are right. Chichimec and Apache tribes shouldn't exist as factions as they never united or fought alongside eachother until hundreds of years later and never really held territory as they were nomadic and never stayed in the same place long enough to establish settlements or borders

Numidian legionaries exist. Numidians copied Roman equipment and they were looking somekind like Hastati and Principes. But, they are bad represented in game.

I'm a simple man. I see Roman's with a machine gun. I click.

3:47 During the Second Punic War two warlords claimed the title of "King of all Numidia", with the pro-Roman Massinissa ending victorious and later modernising the army in a Roman-style fashion (they were allies, after all). Previously, the other warlord Syphax had held a seaport in present-day Algeria (which was also taken over by Massinissa). That unit would be in the line of the reforms made after Massinissa became King.

Top 5 hardest fractions to play as

Haha. The thumbnail nearly killed me with laughter

Intresting note about Russia in m2tw, in the game they control Finland when Sweden should have, and in the map you can see Helsinki as a town, which didn't exist until the 1500's

I imagine the main reason for the names is cause its much more recognizable to audiences who are not entirely well versed in history. After all, the average person would likely know little to nothing about the individual states that were before Russia formed or that Spain was called Castile until the royal marriage that united them and Aragon. Hell, the same goes to the Egyptians. Not many probably realized or knew(Liekly due to popular culture merging the two eras together) that Egypt had alot of greek influence by the time of the Romans. Some sacrifices have to be made for gameplay/enjoyment purposes and hopefully the person would be interested enouh to study up on it(Or versed enough to just get mods that make it more accurate). Though the Portugal one is justified. I have no idea why they are there (Unless it is to the appeal of Portuguese European players).

Mayans were the most un historical in medieval 2. Everything was wrong about them. They never existed as one 'kingdom' or empire. The only thing that united them was their culture which still varied. Anyway the units are wrong, territory is wrong, buildings are also wrong. They just copied and pasted the Aztecs and colored them green snd gave that to the Mayan faction. And most importantly they only existed in ancient times, not medieval times. Like a whole thousand years off.

Top 5 "top 5s" you don't want to do, you can even include this one

To be frank, most of the Medieval Total Wars are really unrealistic, simply because the way Total War Games play, doesn't make sense in a feudal setting like the European Middle Ages. Just look at the closes Medieval Simulator, Crusader Kings 2. From Top to bottom are so many layers of intricate and complex connections and relations, that is just impossible to properly even closely simulate in a Total War Game. Now don't get me wrong, that applies to most settings, but in most cases, it can be excused since the Realms in most other settings are much more centralized than in Medieval Europe, even in Feudal Japan individual Daimyo had much more control over their lands and subjects than your standard European Feudal Lord and even King.

I'd say the Viking Forefathers factions of Atilla Total War. While it is certainly true that some germanic tribes lived in Scandinavia at the time, they likely weren't the the typical "Viking" types yet that would later go on to raid Lindisfarne.

I loved putting the subtitles. When you start by saying “Legend of total war” It’s shown as *I jumped on a wall here*

imho these factions could have been in there: - geats (ATW) - White huns (ATW) - while they are attested in late 80s of 4th century as allies of sassanids, their invasion of persian lands didnt begun until cca 30s of 5th century and so Khingila didnt rule until then - roman usurpers, saxons in jutland, all those vassals of gaul and aurelian and independent egypt (R2TW - empire divided) - adjusted borders of western slavs in ATW:AoC (old czechs didnt hold dresden), Aquitaine and gascony were at that time already under charlemagne rules, danes were divided into 3 kingdoms/tribal areas on jutland peninsula, united croatia didnt exist. - tagmata, menaulatoi and some more high medieval units for ERE - huns looking all mongolian, while they were acording to archeological studies only about 25 % of pure mongolian looking huns amongst huns themselves - ATW: budini, roxolani and jazyges are not atested at that time + they were indoeuropean sarmatians, definetly not mongolians - ATW: slavs factions, there isnt enough known from that period to say that there were 3 large factions controlling such and such territory and with units styled in later early and high medieval - sassanids having satrapies in ATW and R2TW - ED surely there r more but couldn think of them RN btw that rome 1 egypt surprised me lol, definetly number 1 spot

Played the started with captions and his intro said “jumped on a wall here” idk but I can’t stop laughing

I think Numidian Legionaries comes from the fact that Jugurtha, the king of Numidia during the Jugurthine wars, bribed many roman armies. I don’t know for sure if they changed side or if they just refused to fight.

Please try to shorten your intros, it's over 2 minutes before anything is actually said

The Goths and the Germans and Celts having siege equipment and artillery in Attila is total b.s. I should not be able to take Constantinople as the Goths with one artillery unit.

As to the Russia, it should be renamed to "Rus" which is the historical term, and the Capital should be Kiev(Kiev was capital between 882 and 1169). Also lithuania should be split into two provinces, rus should held one of them, and it should stretch from Novgorod to Kiev. It was actualy quite a powerhouse in the timeframe of 1080 In fact the borders of provinces in Russia are atrocious, there are too little provinces considering the size and wealth of Kievan Rus. Kievan Rus, by it's wealth, size and Population was compareable to Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire. Also, 1080 Poland borders stretch too much to the east, and too little to the west. 1080 Poland borders, were mostly simmiliar to modern polish borders, except it didn't include most of Prussia.

top 5 worst ai cheats. infinite money, no public order issues etc.

Good video, I totally agree. My suggestion for the next video is the Top 5 worst Total War bugs.

The Roman type Legionaries in Numidia are probably a reference to Jugurtha, who fought under Scipio Aemilianus and tried to impose the same sort of discipline and tactics on his own infantry when he seized the throne of Numidia. But that was 160 years after the start date of Rome 1.

I hope they make a separate Bronze Age game with Egypt. That would be AMAZING!

I would have mentioned barbarian factions from Rome 1 for stuff like head hurlers and screaming women.

Top 5 most historically accurate factions

Due to engine limitations the older games have tons of those sort so factions which are more of a culture group instead of a single state. Factions like Spain and Russia in M2TW and Germania, Britannia, Gaul, Numidia, Spain, Greek City States, etc. in RTW. A good addition to this list would have been the Hattori from Shogun 2. I don't really know anything about Japanese history, so I don't know if they are even a real "clan" or not. But the game depicts the Hattori as a clan of a whole bunch of ninjas, and their units can spawn all over the battlefield. I know enough to know there wasn't a giant horde of ninjas conquering cities in Japan back then :D

Speaking of Russia, there is a problem of the translation. The faction in M2 should be named "Rus"/"Kievan Rus" (but truly, "Russian lands" according to political division of that time. We see it in the game: independent Novgorod, Smolensk, Kiev etc) I agree that "Novgorod" is better as we actually rule it, but I'm sure CA tried to make Rus itself) By the way, name "Russia" (just a Greek pronunciation of "Rus") is used since XV century, when the majority of Russian lands were reunited under the power of Moscow and Ivan III the Great

Top 5 best Ai controlled factions. Basically with your experience through TW games, which factions consistently do well with the Ai commanding it. Factions like Timurids, Golden horde and Chaos shouldn't count since they have an unfair advantage

Top 5/ or 10 if you want, Best Mercenary Units in overhaul Total War :)

you are right by saying that Portugal and spain are mistakenly represented, but one thing that is also a crucial error it is the familly tree. In the begining of the game the mother of the king is called Teresa which is correct however Teresa was a princess from the kingdom of leon that married the father of our first king, and this same princess is one of "spain's" starter princess... resulting in the same character appearing twice in the game

I was fully expecting every pick to be from the warhammer games.

mongols never took islam as their religion, neither mongol state, neither mongol natives, but some states which appeared at the former mongol empire territory the same about tengri, because mongol empire was tolerate to any religion without any at the first place

France was a bit strange in Medieval Total war, both 1 & 2. The country was in a civil war for centuries. There was chaotic in fighting between the monarchy. How Burgundy was left out is beyond me. They were a major player in the period, and completely ignored. If you could do a video of top 5 historical periods that total should do. That would be awesome. Or Top 5 mods in the series?

A list of all of the historical armies in all of the total war games under famous generals that are ranked from weakest to strongest.

6:25 "Unhistorically accurate" Probably meant "historically inaccurate".

Here are some that I think fit the bill. 1) Macedonia in Alexander Total War. Now I don’t know much about the units, but Greece is represented by Sparta and Macedonia starts out as owning Sparta. Now the campaign map is probably the ugliest one in TW history, but this is even worse because Macedonia never took Sparta. Neither Philip II nor Alexander the Great conquered it. There are many supposed reasons for this, but this is a very famous part of their history. Not even when Alexander’s empire reached India did they control Sparta. The only reason I can imagine they did this was because the movie 300 came out the same year. The factions in Rome 1 are mainly movie versions of the actual ones so it’s not a huge surprise. 2) The Julii, Brutii and Scipii factions in Rome 1. Not only were those families not that prominent at the start of the campaign, not only did they have to change one of the families names in the Italian version because of that, but the Roman Republic did not divide its territory between 3 families. That’s completely ahistorical. 3) Sparta in Rome 2. By the beginning of the campaign, Sparta was nowhere near the power it used to be. Historically speaking, Sparta was a slave state, with the vast majority of its population slaves. This meant that if they took too many losses in war, they could potentially lose control of their slaves. Thus the Spartans often avoided war and declined overtime. 4) The Empire divided campaign. Numerous factions such as Egypt were part of Aurelians empire, but were made independent to make the game more balanced. 5) Pretty much the entirety of the Fall of the Samurai. The actual war lasted around a year, they also did not build that many railways and boats. Also how the Republic was formed is all wrong (especially as technically it isn’t a republic but rather “independent”).

Top 5 most favourite Total War features

I’m surprised that he didn’t include all of the Roman house factions from Rome 1. Those certainly didn’t exist at any point in Roman history as their own states. Especially at that point in Roman history, it would’ve all just been one single state.

Cool Video keep up the good work sir.✌️

It might be as bad as these other examples but Total war Empire has a few historical hiccups as well. For one Great Britain shouldn’t be referred as that at the start, in 1700 they were still referred as England at that time. They never been known as Britain until 1707 after the Acts of Union had been ratified and gave themselves that name. Also Russia’s capital shouldn’t be Moscow for most of the game. Since 1703 St. Petersburg had been Russia’s capital up until the overthrowing of the Czar in the Russian Revolution when they changed it back to Moscow.

Top 5 Legendoftotalwar's Top 5 videos

It'd be interesting to have a bronze age total war game, although I'm not sure our knowledge of that time period is good enough to put something together

Interesting little tidbit, we are closer to Cleopatra's Egypt time wise than Cleopatra's Egypt was to the dynasty that built the great pyramid. Also next list, top 5 easter eggs in total war

What about nova carthago?

ahistorical or historically inaccurate just my two denarii

Congratulations 🎊 on 1 million views

Your splash screen for this vid - that’s just a whole nightmare of possibilities right there.

I would wish that we will have a new total war game in the bronze age Maybe it would be called *Total War : Achilles*

Best thumbnail ever.

I can share some information about Portugal and Spain in medieval 2. So by the time of the game, Portugal didn't exist, that's true. Altough, in 1095 there was the County of Portucal, a gift from the king of the kingdom of "Leão" e "Castela" (2 unified kingdoms, and in-game(because of the region occupied) there's a third kingdom integrated in the kingdom of Spain and a fourth kingdom, for some reason, belongs to Portugal....i don't know either). The heir to the County of Portugal wasn't born yet, he was borned in 1109, so the faction leader of Portugal should be much younger and have no children until 1109. Other thing is the fact that the Moors occupied half of the Iberian Peninsula, so Lisbon, by that time, was in moorish control, the county of Portucale was far north (in the northern region of the now actual Portugal) . Also, the faction heir(to Portugal) in-game, is in real life the first king of Portugal. His father (faction leader) tried to gain independence but lost the battle, years later his son , Afonso Henriques, with the full support of the population and nobility from the County, took up arms against his own mother (that was daughter to the previous king of Castela) and he won, being only 14 years old. Ok, now forgetting about children and the timelines a little bit: One thing they should have done was creating more settlements in Iberian Peninsula, 3 in the region of Portugal where only one was occupied by portuguese and the rest bu the Moors. Spain divided by 3/4 kingdoms depending on the timeline and half their territory belonging to the Moors, and adding at least more 4 settlements in the region of Spain and 2 others in the region controlled by the Moors.

Discovered this channel through this video, subscribed.

Top 5 holiest factions. DEUS VULT!!!!!!!!!!

I find Milan to be a questionable faction in medieval 2 total war; relatively speaking it was only autonomous from the holy roman empire for a short period of time, surrendering to Frederick Barbarossa in 1163. On top of that Milan never owned Genoa which makes the borders of the Milanese inaccurate. It would have made far more sense to have the Genoese over the Milanese. This is because the republic of Genoa was independent throughout the medieval period, had notable influence over Lombardy, Corsica and Sardinia, as well as Genoese crossbowmen actually being somewhat accurate (in spite of the inaccuracy of pavise shields in Medieval 2)

Before watching the video... Medieval 1 - Italy (Pretty sure Itally wasn't unified until about 1850s or so)

I heard the reason why they went with Bronze Age Egypt in RTW was because they wanted to increase the appeal of a game they were not sure would be popular. Making the entire eastern Mediterranean all Hellenistic hoplite factions seemed repetitive and the Egypt of the Pharaohs was far more exotic, even though it was completely inaccurate.

I agree with most of these however I would say the TIMURIDS in M2TW w/cannon Elephants were pretty unrealistic as a faction.