griping

[zeuxis the mighty]

I love RTW with a passion but i hate the following

1. Noob squares
nothing i hate more than when people make a phalanx square online. first, they always lose no matter what (yes, you too Sparts). second, its bad tactics, sure you wont get flanked but it wouldn't matter if I already took out 1/2 your army with missile troops would it.

2. AI
I respect the fact that good AI is very hard to make but their strategy leaves something to be desired.

3.money
It seems that unless you're Roman or Greek, you're basicly dirt poor most of the time

[Kratos]

3.money
It seems that unless you're Roman or Greek, you're basicly dirt poor most of the time

This depends on the skill of the player. I'm currently playing a german campaign and have yet to experience any financial problems. Follow the basic economic guidelines (farms, roads, traders, ports) and you will be fine.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

I have no trouble participating in this thread

I dislike:
1) overpowered chariots in any form. The game designers need to raise their cost incredibly or nuke their stats considerably.

2) people who trashtalk for no good reason.

3) Macedon's lack of Thessalian cavalry and proper hypaspists

4) Rome's super-powered cavalry

[Roman14]

4) Rome's super-powered cavalry

i was disapointed in the begining that their calv was so weak but after the marius reform it just got crazy i mean legionary calvary are supirior to basicly all greek like faction and barbarian faction.Of course by then i have half the world under my command

[Scutarii]

I have no trouble participating in this thread

I dislike:
1) overpowered chariots in any form. The game designers need to raise their cost incredibly or nuke their stats considerably.

2) people who trashtalk for no good reason.

3) Macedon's lack of Thessalian cavalry and proper hypaspists

4) Rome's super-powered cavalry

Well, three out of four can be fixed by mods.... Although I do agree with you, particularly on 3). Macedon in vanilla is just the Seleucids without the bells and whistles (ie, cataphracts, chariots, elephants, legionaries, you get the picture.) CA should have given Macedon some justice.

[zeuxis the mighty]

I'm sorry if that was considered spamming but I really had to get it off my chest. Its been bottled up for quite a while.

I dislike:
1) overpowered chariots in any form. The game designers need to raise their cost incredibly or nuke their stats considerably.

2) people who trashtalk for no good reason.

3) Macedon's lack of Thessalian cavalry and proper hypaspists

4) Rome's super-powered cavalry

1. I agree the AI makes way too many chariots in my games.

2. I don't like trash talking (unless about noob squares) and if some one trash talks me online I choose not to respond.

3. CA did very well with all the factions except Macedon in my opinion, they're just too underpowered compared to compete as well as they should.

4. very true, all the post-marian roman cav is basicly just made up

and on the comment i made about non-roman and greek factions being dirt poor. Yes other factions can become very rich over time, this I know. But, its frustrating to know that If I wanted to play as gaul, chances are in the early part of the game Ill get stomped due to lack of good income and unit quality until all my settlements get to a higher level.

[snuggans]

3. CA did very well with all the factions except Macedon in my opinion, they're just too underpowered compared to compete as well as they should.

really? i found them a little bit overpowered when playing as the GCS. i've been playing too much XGM but i distinctly remember in vanilla how macedonian phalangites not only had about 50% more units than their greek counterparts, but their spears were longer (as it occurred sometimes in history) and they were able to start doing damage earlier due to this. however they were generally easy to conquer because the AI not only spammed levy phalangites but had no concept of flanking or how to prevent it.

they also had ACTUAL cavalry and not the light crap that the GCS get.

[Kratos]

and on the comment i made about non-roman and greek factions being dirt poor. Yes other factions can become very rich over time, this I know. But, its frustrating to know that If I wanted to play as gaul, chances are in the early part of the game Ill get stomped due to lack of good income and unit quality until all my settlements get to a higher level.

Don't worry about it, give it a try Gaul and Germania are in my opinion by far the most entertaining campaigns. Nothing is like having gold chevron forresters or gothic cavalry steamrolling anything in their path. You will learn how to handle the economy quite quickly, it is easy once you get past those first years.
Try it, and if you run into problems TWC is here to help you

[Draugdur]

and on the comment i made about non-roman and greek factions being dirt poor. Yes other factions can become very rich over time, this I know. But, its frustrating to know that If I wanted to play as gaul, chances are in the early part of the game Ill get stomped due to lack of good income and unit quality until all my settlements get to a higher level.

Yes, well, I found that a bigger problem when playing Gaul in particular was the fact that you had to fight (under circumstances) on 4 fronts, which increases army needs and thus upkeep. Once I dealt with Spain I had no more money problems.
And as for other non-Roman/Greek factions...well, playing as Numidia, I had 100.000 gold in my treasury most of the time, and I just couldn't spend it due to the huge income per turn

[piranha45]

I agree, having just completed my Gaul campaign (med camp. diff and vh battle diff), it was a ***** starting out lol. I had heard of the horrors one encounters when the Romans live past the Marian reforms, so I was forced to let Britannia tear into my french holdings unheeded while I (clumsily) dealt with the four foul houses of Italy.

But holy freakin cow, once you get Forresters, its alllllll downhill. You don't even have to bother with any other units, IME, once you get a half stack of forresters in a given army. You'll start ANNIHILATING evenly-matched AI armies, and coming out with 0-10 unit losses, total.

If you want to be more sporting, you can stick with Chosen Swordsmen and cavalry, and that works fine too. I didn't start using Forresters until I had about 20 provinces, mostly due to my ignorance.

[Internazionale]

I think the chariots should not just push the soldiers to the side, but cut their feet off like in the movie Alexander

[snuggans]

I think the chariots should not just push the soldiers to the side, but cut their feet off like in the movie Alexander

you're getting way ahead of CA
notice they didnt even include blood in RTW

a way of bowing down to ESRB in order to get more money

notice they have blood in M2TW

and they've announced that we'll have things such as realistic gunshot hits and cannonball fatalities in ETW, so think they are heading in the right direction

[Internazionale]

you're getting way ahead of CA
notice they didnt even include blood in RTW

a way of bowing down to ESRB in order to get more money

notice they have blood in M2TW

and they've announced that we'll have things such as realistic gunshot hits and cannonball fatalities in ETW, so think they are heading in the right direction

I know They will also include ragdolls! Imagine when they are dying they will not die using the same animations over and over, but will fly when shot at by cannons and fall over eachother! Also when you fire on the ground the dead men will fly once more

I know, its still a way to go... But it was just my idea. Rome 2 Total War will hopefully include better graphics, animations and gameplay when its released In 2112....

[snuggans]

Also when you fire on the ground the dead men will fly once more

really? oo thats probably going to hurt FPS..
it saves alot of resources to have corpses become static after animations and ragdoll ends..

[zeuxis the mighty]

well in my vanilla games as the GCS, Macedon never lasts longer than about 250 BC because of myself and the brutii romans. So its just a matter of opinion and different game results.

[zeuxis the mighty]

actually I have won numerous campaigns as barbarian factions, but i just don't find them as enjoyable because my favorite part of the game is the first 100 or so turns before factions start to die out. I still enjoy the late game on the way to victory and domination but, at that point most all units are elites so there is less challenge.

By "stomped" earlier i didn't mean destroyed, I meant more along the lines of... suffering too many setbacks that it gets annoying, example: having nearly all settlements sieged in a turn and I have to sally them to victory, being surrounded by enemies, and all Roman opposition in general.

[movemove]

truth to be told, this is a discusion forum, the OP posts and everyone else posts their thoughts.
that said this (refering to the topic of the thread) has been discussed too much alread.

[snuggans]

truth to be told, this is a discusion forum, the OP posts and everyone else posts their thoughts.
that said this (refering to the topic of the thread) has been discussed too much alread.

yes, yes and yes.

2. AI
I respect the fact that good AI is very hard to make but their strategy leaves something to be desired.

go very hard. CA tries to make up for AI behavior or lack thereof by giving AI units alot of combat bonuses and huge financial help in the campaign map. just dont go by the unit stats if you choose to go this path, they mean very little in VH.

3.money
It seems that unless you're Roman or Greek, you're basicly dirt poor most of the time

rome and greece get access to ports from the get-go. but with any faction the measurement of how poor you are rests mostly on the player's skill.