Rome worth it now?

[Manco]

Have the added patches improved the game enough to be worth my money?
Or are there mods out there which are worth buying Rome for?


(Was disappointed with it on release day and never bothered to buy it)

[<purplepenguin>]

Both
Rome is definetly worth it but maybe you should wait for empire

[Manco]

Both
Rome is definetly worth it but maybe you should wait for empire

?

I'm talking about EU:Rome, not R:TW. Which I have in my possession for several years and have played dozens of mods for

[Manco]

Of well, when you say Rome around here, the first thing we think of is EU: Rome. Just like when you go to Italy and shout "How do you get to Rome" (in Italian, of course), everybody knows that you're talking about Rome, Georgia in the U.S.

When you're in the Paradox games subforum, yeah, I'd expect everyone knwos I'm talking about EU:Rome

[hellheaven1987]

It is quite an ok game with newest patch (love the random barbarian faction). However, it may be possible to wait a little long for that.

[Darkarbiter]

To an extent, yes.

The patches have allmost fixed omens (its much nicer now they are more of an ambient thing), I dunno if the ai still uses them or if its controlled by the high priest events as well. The way it works now is depending on how good your high priest is, theres a chance of a random omen being good/bad, more importantly though is its often something you don't want, or maybe not the main one, so it requires you to rethink your strategy and makes the game deeper instead of being this stupid little button that allows you to be overpowered in wars/colonisation.

The extra events make it so barbarians can colonise, eventually... theres also some other ones that are pretty nice.

I think the biggest problem is, the general political situation isn't the best... if someone were to make a mod that extends the map to india, I'm sure that'd make the game far more interesting . Or maybe a good total conversion...

[Kanaric]

I'd wait for another patch, the game still is about the same.

[Manco]

thx for the info guys, I guess I'm gonna wait at least another patch then.

[Ragabash]

I wouldn't touch the game even with a meter long stick. I seriously doubt they will be able to make the game any better unless they do a complete overhaul of the system; not to mention that EU: Rome mods are quite "amateurish" compared to V.I.P and Magna Mundi for an example.

[Ali_the_English]

Patch 1.3 has definately improved it. The best new feature is how barbarian hordes can form their own factions. Its a lot better than it was but I think it still needs some improvement. Theres an expansion coming out in a few months anyway.

[dogukan]

I don't think I'll ever play EU-Rome after Europa Barbarum....Europa barbarum is more detailed than EU-Rome lol and EU rome sucked if I'm asked.
It's only fun if yoU're Roman and that gets boring in time too.
(PS:I'm a big fan of EU and HOI series)

[Chuffy]

What are the actual problems with Rome? I hear bits and pieces but I've seen nothing that gives a clear picture as to what exactly is wrong with the game.

[John I Tzimisces]

What are the actual problems with Rome? I hear bits and pieces but I've seen nothing that gives a clear picture as to what exactly is wrong with the game.

It tries to be both Crusader Kings and Europa Universalis and does not do a very good job.
Character interaction (when I played) was at a minimum: In Crusader Kings, if you had a king with bad traits your entire realm could fall apart. Marriages seem to really have very little meaning...I think, in your own sphere, the only one's really having children are your family. Everyone else might just be spawned, I'm unsure. It's a little whacked.
The rest of the game is based on EU...essentially the things the player does is limited to the military maintenance slider, and picking advisers for the 6 areas of technology advancement (which all, no matter how talented an adviser you had, still went at the same slow rate. Interaction between countries is essentially limited to negotiating trade, offering tribute, demanding tribute, and going to war. You can try and support revolts I think...

The civil wars that could very well occur (and I had seen occur now and then) never happened to me. Certain mechanics with it were broke at first...such as loyal nobles continuously sending soldiers to you until you went broke from the maintenance...

then there was the colonization aspect which was boring and weird...basically you put soldiers in the province you want. Wait for the barbarians to get pissed off, kill them all, colonize the province. And even if it's your soldiers there, another country can get it first anyway, because where colonists come from is based on what is the bordering province with the highest level of development (civilization)...which is kinda arbitarily assigned so that ROME of course is the most developed province in Europe in 280 BC.

Ugh. The game is boring. It's essentially impossible to play vanilla as anyone but the five largest nations (Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Seleucids, Macedon)...the Seleucids never collapse, culturally and religiously convert most of persia...they get ridiculous...

[hellheaven1987]

The Civil War is pretty fun after new patch though; I remember once my Carthage Empire went into Civil War ten years after the game and the whole thing is one-side favor to me (there are sooooo many free mercenaries and good commanders join me that revolt was put down in one year).

Besides, it really depends on what type of government you are; for those who have monarchy (Egypt, Seleucid, Macedon, Armenia) Civil War is common like daily meals; for Rome, the loyalty of generals would reduce constantly BUT they would not rebel no matter what. Overall, Carthage has the best government system as your characters (seems everyone) just keeps rising loyalty no matter how miserable you treat them.

[John I Tzimisces]

You're able to play armenia? I had to start at a later date when it's slightly larger and the seleucids are weakened by civil war...

[hellheaven1987]

You're able to play armenia? I had to start at a later date when it's slightly larger and the seleucids are weakened by civil war...

Why??

Armenia is quite an easy country to play except you need to deal some Greeks and Barbarians.

For Seleucid, their empire always rebel, or they are fighting Egyptian; pay them some money and get a good relationship with them is the key to prevent them invade you (ask military access too since it help to stable the relation).

[John I Tzimisces]

Why??

Armenia is quite an easy country to play except you need to deal some Greeks and Barbarians.

For Seleucid, their empire always rebel, or they are fighting Egyptian; pay them some money and get a good relationship with them is the key to prevent them invade you (ask military access too since it help to stable the relation).

In the version I was playing, player-controlled Armenia was inevitably attacked by either pontus or the seleucids in the first month for two...

Well I just played it with the 1.3 patch and smashed pontus pretty badly after they declared war on me THREE DAYS after hitting start. Good old river and terrain bonus in Armenia from Pontus. In a pickle now as the Seleucids refuse to accept tribute or to grant me military access...or me to grant them military access (I really...really...wanted to). And so now I'm boned as the sels with an army twice the size of mine invade.

[Darkarbiter]

Armenia is one of those countries that can either go well or badly with, although its highly dependent on chance... so I don't allways like playing them.

[hellheaven1987]

Ya, but if your luck is good Armenia can become some sore of super power of East (by conquer Macedon, Seleucid, Egypt).

[Darkarbiter]

Well its like byzantines in eu3 in, only a bit more random. I mean you can pretty reliably not totally lose in eu3 in as byz, wheras in eu rome as armenia its just relying on the fact the selecuds don't send 2 20 stacks ur way because that civil war/war with ptoloemies you were relying on just ended.