Total War: ROME II - Empire Divided

[Julianus Flavius]

Lol, and for loveless fantasy clone-army trash like this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

they seriously demand 17 bucks. This isn't even on Steam Workshop level.
Meanwhile, you can get this for free (Eras of Rome):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

7

Unfortunately the guy that makes the Pax Romana mod (the one in the screens here) has decided to cease updating of the mod. So if the new DLC breaks it, I guess that's that. How ironic.

[eXistenZ]

Which is unfortunate. But I don't see "it will break some mods" as a reason not to make new content and patch the game. While I do empathise with those whose favourite mods may be broken, first and foremost these games are designed to be played unmodded, and so using mods is always a case of "use at your own risk." Not updating the game because of mods is to me a much greater problem.


I'm a strong believer in adapting your playstyle to suit the game, rather than adapting the game to suit your playstyle. To me agents are a part of both the setting and the game, and so removing them would have a negative effect on both. Espionage has been a part of war as long as we have had war,


.

1) that would only be a valid reason if the last update they made before this one wasnt 30 months ago. This is in my eyes, a cheap bone they throw to the historical fans to keep them occupied. And my view is strenghtened by the lack of big changes/fixes. Even the new dlc doesnt look very different from the original game. And as a result we will have a lot of broken mods, of which we are not sure they will be updated. When you make the sum, this is a negative result

2) espionage as in scouting and such is indeed a part of warfare. There is a difference between knowing where an enemy army is/its composition, and bringing it completly to a halt with one guy. When it comes to a stage you need to fear the potential damage of agents more than the potential damage output of a 3000man army, there is a problem with how warfare is portrayed

[Welsh Dragon]

1) that would only be a valid reason if the last update they made before this one wasnt 30 months ago. This is in my eyes, a cheap bone they throw to the historical fans to keep them occupied. And my view is strenghtened by the lack of big changes/fixes. Even the new dlc doesnt look very different from the original game. And as a result we will have a lot of broken mods, of which we are not sure they will be updated. When you make the sum, this is a negative result

The Next Major Historical is still a little while away, so CA's trying something new and going back to older games. To me that's not a cheap bone, that's a good move that benefits the players and one I hope they will continue with. Total War games have always been ambitious, and history is full of events which lend themselves to Total War gameplay, but which aren't significant enough to carry a full game. So making DLC like this, and Saga titles as well, mean we'll get to see more history brought to life, and have more campaigns to play. Who knows, maybe next time it will be Attila or Shogun 2 getting something new?

As for mods, anyone wanting to play with mods which are broken by Patch 18, can easily play them with Patch 17 by opting into it through the Betas tab. Problem solved.

And I'm not sure how you can say it has a lack of big changes/fixes when they're doing a major overhaul of the politics system, as well as quite a few changes that will improve the game and QOL. Equally the new DLC looks quite different to me, given the change in era, factions and new campaign mechanics being added.

So to me there is no real downside to these decisions.

2) espionage as in scouting and such is indeed a part of warfare. There is a difference between knowing where an enemy army is/its composition, and bringing it completly to a halt with one guy. When it comes to a stage you need to fear the potential damage of agents more than the potential damage output of a 3000man army, there is a problem with how warfare is portrayed

One man's actions wiped out three legions. His name was Arminius. Many ancient settlements relied on one well for water, poison that and the consequences were disastrous. And there's a great balancing method for high level agents in Grand Campaign. It's called Old Age! So perhaps the issue isn't the game, it's the mods that make those characters last longer? (Which may also explain why I haven't encountered these issues much, as I play the default TPY for each campaign, so 1TPY for Grand Campaign.

That said, as I said in my last post I'm open to the system being tweaked. I just don't want to see it removed or neutered.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[eXistenZ]

One man's actions wiped out three legions. His name was Arminius. .

Did he singlehandely killed 3 legions? I think the 10.000+ germans he brought along helped a lot. I also would compare the battle of teutoberg more to ambush mechanic than to a agent action if we are speaking in game terms rather than a poisoned well

I dont disagree that agent warfare wasnt done. I say its immensly overpowered in the game (and as such a misrepresentation. Thats one of the things CA shoudl have looked into if they wanted to come back to rome 2. I tend to disagree with the term "major" for the overhaul. There are a few actions added for statesmen yes, and the civil war mechanic is changed (yet unless you play badly, you're not ment to see that happening in your game). There are new government forms (again, which you use once, maybe two times in your campaign). If they wanted to come back to rome 2, there are so many things they could have changed for the better, rather than add something fairly superficial to it.


I find it also unfair to blame the people who improve their game with mods that CA has decided to that all up, after doing nothing with the game for 30 months. There is obviously a difference between patch 17 vs 18, and patch 18 vs this update

[PikeStance]

Did he singlehandely killed 3 legions? I think the 10.000+ germans he brought along helped a lot. I also would compare the battle of teutoberg more to ambush mechanic than to a agent action if we are speaking in game terms rather than a poisoned well

I dont disagree that agent warfare wasnt done. I say its immensly overpowered in the game (and as such a misrepresentation. Thats one of the things CA shoudl have looked into if they wanted to come back to rome 2. I tend to disagree with the term "major" for the overhaul. There are a few actions added for statesmen yes, and the civil war mechanic is changed (yet unless you play badly, you're not ment to see that happening in your game). There are new government forms (again, which you use once, maybe two times in your campaign). If they wanted to come back to rome 2, there are so many things they could have changed for the better, rather than add something fairly superficial to it.


I find it also unfair to blame the people who improve their game with mods that CA has decided to that all up, after doing nothing with the game for 30 months. There is obviously a difference between patch 17 vs 18, and patch 18 vs this update

They also overhaul the tech tree. It is an idea/ event driven mechanics that is Paradox- ish like.
When it comes to patches no one is worse than Paradox. It is inconvenience, but if you want the game to be improved then that is how it works.

[eXistenZ]

oh you're not gonna here me praise paradox. Their attitude to CK2 is "pile dlc and content on it without regards to balance".

Where did they say they would overhaul the tech tree? I know they resdesigned the skill tree (I really hope TTT is getting updated), but tech always played a lesser role in TW compared to other games, so don't see why they would bother there, instead of the more important issues (like AI diplomacy and agent). I have to reject non aggresion pcts from factions from halfway accros the map every two turns for example

As for politics, I just had the same event for the 3rd time in 55 turns (riot in the capital)... you can not say they spent that much effort in it

[Padredeperritos]

I'm a little confused. I looked but couldn't find the answer. Are the new unit cards part of the patch or part of the new DLC?

[Alwyn]

I have the patch but not the DLC. So far, the unit cards look the same as they did before. So I'm guessing that the new unit cards are part of the DLC, not the patch.

I agree that agents were overpowered in patch 17. The first time one of my armies was mass-poisoned by a high level agent, I felt as if my army had been hit by air strike! Are agents still overpowered with the Power & Politics patch? The patch notes say that poisoning effects have been reduced. With the new patch, one of my low-level agents poisoned an enemy army, killing six out of 28 members of one cavalry unit. That seemed okay to me. I'll be interested to see how mass-poisoning by a high level agent works now.

The ability to change the size of the user interface makes a big difference to me - before the new patch, it was almost too small to use on my screen. Now, I can see details which were too small before, such as the little icons indicating seasonal effects in a province. The information panel on units works well for me too - easier to use than the in-game encyclopaedia (with tiny writing and scroll bar).

I'll be interested to see how the effects of the different government types play out over the length of a campaign. I like some of the small details of the changes, such as the 'third trait' of rival parties in your faction (which changes when they have a new leader) and ability to see the skill tree when levelling up an agent or general. I noticed that the generals at the start of the Grand Campaign for the Iceni are now Heroic Riders, not Heroic Nobles. (A tiny change, but a good change in my view, because Heroic Nobles can charge any unit without needing any thought, but Heroic Riders need to be used carefully to avoid spearmen.) Naming the rival parties in your faction (not just calling them 'other families') and giving them a more visible leader is a nice touch (I'm watching you, Seahorse Clan!)

I can see that mod users could be annoyed that they need to choose between continuing with their mods or using the new patch, if the mods are no longer being updated. However, I've seen criticisms of the game creators for not doing more work on this game and, now they have done more work, they get blamed for that as well. No-one is forcing players to use the new patch and the advice from CA tells us how to opt out. If some modders don't update their mods, it seems a bit unfair to blame the game creators.

[Welsh Dragon]

Did he singlehandely killed 3 legions? I think the 10.000+ germans he brought along helped a lot. I also would compare the battle of teutoberg more to ambush mechanic than to a agent action if we are speaking in game terms rather than a poisoned well

Yes Teutonberg is more of an Ambush. But it still shows one person can have a big difference. High level agents are much the same, in that they can become key figures in history. But as I've already said, I don't disagree that maybe agent warfare should be looked at further. I think it's in a decent place now, maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. Let's see how the new status quo works before changing it further.

I dont disagree that agent warfare wasnt done. I say its immensly overpowered in the game (and as such a misrepresentation. Thats one of the things CA shoudl have looked into if they wanted to come back to rome 2. I tend to disagree with the term "major" for the overhaul. There are a few actions added for statesmen yes, and the civil war mechanic is changed (yet unless you play badly, you're not ment to see that happening in your game). There are new government forms (again, which you use once, maybe two times in your campaign). If they wanted to come back to rome 2, there are so many things they could have changed for the better, rather than add something fairly superficial to it.

As for politics, yes if you play the system well you can avoid it. But that means you're engaging in the political element of the game, something that was largely ignored before. Ignore it, especially on higher difficulty levels, and you run the risk of having your plans fall apart. it's still another element to consider, which adds to gameplay and which can surprise you even if you are playing well. I've already had one secession I wasn't prepared for happen because I lost the opposing party leader in battle, which caused a large enough hit to that parties loyalty that I couldn't recover it. This happened in the middle of a multi-front war, so it turned the whole campaign on it's head. Something that would never have happened in Patch 17 or earlier.

Making politics relevant is to me one of the biggest improvements they could make, and they have.

I find it also unfair to blame the people who improve their game with mods that CA has decided to that all up, after doing nothing with the game for 30 months. There is obviously a difference between patch 17 vs 18, and patch 18 vs this update

I'm not blaming anyone. All I'm pointing out is that using mods is a choice with advantages, disadvantages and consequences.

But CA isn't messing up anything for anyone. As I have already said, anyone who wants to play with mods can play with Patch 17 (which is the current live build which has been around since 2015, which you still have if you haven't opted into the Power & Politics Beta aka Patch 18, and which pretty much all mods are compatible with) all they have to do is opt into it from the Betas Tab. Quick, easy, takes a matter of minutes and all your mods will still work fine.

If they want to play the new campaign or play with the new politics system, they can. Just play with Patch 18 aka Power & Politics, (and for the campaign buy Empire Divided DLC.)

If they want to try out the new system, but then choose to go back to their mods, they can by opting into Patch 17 when they want to use mods.

If they want to play with their mods and the new systems, then yes they are going to have to wait for the mods to be updated, and maybe some won't be. But as I have already said, they are no worse off than they were, they just have to choose which is more important to them. New politics or Patch 17 mods?

So really, how is anyone who wants to play the same mods they've been playing for the past two years penalised by those of us that don't really play with mods actually getting something new?

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

EDIT:

I'm a little confused. I looked but couldn't find the answer. Are the new unit cards part of the patch or part of the new DLC?

New unit cards are for the new paid campaign DLC Empire Divided. All other campaigns retain their respective unit cards, which I'm very happy about.

[Padredeperritos]

[QUOTE=Alwyn;15443261]I have the patch but not the DLC. So far, the unit cards look the same as they did before. So I'm guessing that the new unit cards are part of the DLC, not the patch.


Ok, that's what I was seeing too. Gracias!

[eXistenZ]

Yes, individual figures can have a big impact in history. Most of them in the general seat... If arminius was in the game, he would be classified as a general, not an agent. Its a bad example that im not gonna spend more time on, and neither should you

A better one would be Ephailtes, who betrayed the spartans to the persians. A similar mechanic was actually in earlier TW's, where you could infiltrate settlements with spies who would open the gates for you in a siege. Thats is a bit more realistic than having master poisoners who kills thousands of soldiers in their lifetimes and halting entire armies in their sparedays

To me, they havent changed a lot to politics. If you ignored it before, you could have a civil war as well. Same here, except there are a few more thingies here and there you can do. But fine, thats a matter of perception, lets agree to disagree.


If people cant use their favourite combination of mods anymore because of the 10 they use, 4 didnt get updated, yes, they are way worse off then before. So yes, they will be penalised. And basicly because CA, rather than doing something completly new, wanted to do a quickie to score. Except it looks to me like an owngoal

[PikeStance]

oh you're not gonna here me praise paradox. Their attitude to CK2 is "pile dlc and content on it without regards to balance".

Where did they say they would overhaul the tech tree? I know they resdesigned the skill tree (I really hope TTT is getting updated), but tech always played a lesser role in TW compared to other games, so don't see why they would bother there, instead of the more important issues (like AI diplomacy and agent). I have to reject non aggresion pcts from factions from halfway accros the map every two turns for example

From Steam Store Page
New Narrative Technologies

All technology trees have been restructured and redesigned to reflect the time-period and each of the game’s culture groups. Moreover, technologies in Empire Divided don’t represent scientific or technological breakthroughs; rather they represent the measures taken by rulers to deal with specific problems facing their empires. In this way, they help to tell the story of each faction’s journey through the period. This is especially true for the Heroic factions:

• Aurelian’s technologies chart the journey of an emperor who must reform the military, then unify and defend his empire.
• Zenobia’s technologies tell the story of her rise to power.
• Tetricus’ technologies reveal his Republican political views in an age of fractured empire.
• Hormizd’s technologies portray him as a ruler living up to the image of his predecessors, the great kings of the past.
• Cannonades’ technologies tell a tale of Gothic bloodlust, and the many challenges his people must overcome in order to unify and persevere.

This is different for a CA game. [I wasn't actually praising Paradox, just using them as a comparison.
For most of CA's games regarding diplomacy issue, I usually have to use a Mod/ or I change it myself

As for politics, I just had the same event for the 3rd time in 55 turns (riot in the capital)... you can not say they spent that much effort in it

Thanks for sharing your experience.

[eXistenZ]

Sounds more like seperate tech trees for factions (which they often do) than anything else

[Alwyn]

If people cant use their favourite combination of mods anymore because of the 10 they use, 4 didnt get updated, yes, they are way worse off then before. So yes, they will be penalised. ...

How can they be "worse off"? If they opt out of the patch - which the game creators explained how to do in the patch notes - then they will be in the same position that they're in now, won't they? All 10 mods will work.

[PikeStance]

Sounds more like seperate tech trees for factions (which they often do) than anything else

I always thought that in the past the tech tree were generic with the only real difference being based on different culture groups. Moreover, they were actual tech trees. They didn't effect events in the game at all. Depending on what you choose, then the events will change. At least, that is how it was explained. That is a tool used by Paradox in most of their games (e.g. Hearts of Iron 4)

I would be interested to learn people with early access have to say about it.

[eXistenZ]

How can they be "worse off"? If they opt out of the patch - which the game creators explained how to do in the patch notes - then they will be in the same position that they're in now, won't they? All 10 mods will work.

you really think every modmaker is gonna make two versions of every mod? Either they will update it, so it only works with the new patch, or they will do nothing

so mod A, B, C, D will only work with the new patch. Mod E, F, and G are untouched and only work with patch 18

[PikeStance]

you really think every modmaker is gonna make two versions of every mod? Either they will update it, so it only works with the new patch, or they will do nothing

so mod A, B, C, D will only work with the new patch. Mod E, F, and G are untouched and only work with patch 18

This actually sucks as a player. I there are a few mods with hearts of Iron 4 I wanted to use, but they were not updated. There just isn't much you can do. The alternative is the game makes do not "fix" things in the game. You can't remember whine about something being broken and then whine that they fixed it. Just gotta roll with it.

[Alwyn]

You may well be right that mod creators won't make two versions of every mod. Having said that, it shouldn't be too difficult for modders to make patch 17 versions of mods available, should it? If such versions already exist, all they have to do is to make them available. It doesn't take long to make a mod available, either here or on the Steam Workshop, when you have already created the mod, does it?

How would you prefer game designers to act when they have released a game which fans criticised - should they stop making patches after mods are released or should they continue trying to improve the game? I prefer the second option. Of course, I know that it's been a long time since the game was released and that modders put a lot of time and expertise into their mods, working for free to make a better experience for others.

So far, my patch 17 compatible mods seem to work with the new patch. For example, the window indicating that the Guaranteed Major Faction Empires mod was active appeared at the start of a campaign, like normal. Presumably, some mods will only be compatible with one patch or the other. I wonder if other players would be willing to comment on their experiences of using mods with the new patch (perhaps a new thread is needed for this)?

If a player is worried about a mod being updated to patch 18 and not working in patch 17 anymore, could they copy and paste the current version of the mod from their Rome II data folder to a different folder, then unsubscribe from the mod after it is updated, then copy the patch 17 compatible mod back into their data folder? I haven't modded Rome II, so I don't know whether that would work or not. (Based on my experience of Empire TW modding, I wonder whether they need to open the mod in Pack File Manager and change it to a 'video' type mod so that it would apply without needing to be activated by a mod manager, or does Rome II work differently?)

[eXistenZ]

How would you prefer game designers to act when they have released a game which fans criticised - should they stop making patches after mods are released or should they continue trying to improve the game? I prefer the second option. Of course, I know that it's been a long time since the game was released and that modders put a lot of time and expertise into their mods, working for free to make a better experience for others.

Like said before, that would only be a valid argument if there isnt a window of 30 months between this update and the previous one. This is gonna break more than it fixes

[Welsh Dragon]

Like said before, that would only be a valid argument if there isnt a window of 30 months between this update and the previous one. This is gonna break more than it fixes

No, it is valid. It could be 10 years from now and it would still be valid. Because mods are built on the shoulders of the work done by people at the game studios and on the foundations of the game and it's content. And so it is always the modders responsibility to make their mod work with the game, not the other way around.

There's nothing stopping modders from uploading two versions. We already have some mods that do that for Patch 16 and 17. If modders choose to do so for this, great. If they choose not to, well then that's on them not CA.

If you choose to play with mods, you accepted the risk that something like this would happen. If you want to keep using your favourite mods and you think there may be an issue, maybe try contacting your favourite mod makers and ask them politely to please maintain a legacy Patch 17 version? Or even better, offer to help do so.

But mods and hypothetical incompatibilities are not a reason for CA not to update their game. And they've done pretty much everything they can, short of just not making the new update and Campaign DLC at all, to help modders avoid issues. They've even given them several weeks headstart on updating their mods!

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

P.S. I too would like to see the open gates agent action return. That was always fun... well except when units just charged through the open gates and died to the boiling oil dropped on their heads.