Rome - or EU3?

[Geleco]

Title says it all, they're both on sale on Steam. EU3 is $15, Rome is $10. I can't afford both, so which should I pick up?

[Slaytaninc]

EUIII.

It has a much larger community.

[0N3]

at least 95% of paradox fans will say EU3, no doubt. Buy EU3 now!

[Darkarbiter]

at least 95% of paradox fans will say EU3, no doubt. Buy EU3 now!

No, 97% who post on the forums.

Maybe 70% of paradox fans generally.

[Pious Agnost]

EUIII

No contest.

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

EUIII(I guess this includes all the expansions?) is a much more complete game(with the expansions.).
Rome felt very unfinished, like they didn't really know what to do and how to do it.

[.Achilles.]

Not sure. In the UK at least, Amazon is still cheaper than steam for EU, and 50p more for Rome gold. I prefer having the Disc .

Although I'm sure EU III is greatly preferred by most of Paradox's grand strategy fans, you must take into account that several patches and Vae Victis expansion vastly improve the Roman game, and most reviews are based on the vanilla 1.0 product, which indeed did have big problems... but not unlike many of Paradox's games. I've heard many times that Paradox's games don't truly start until v1.03. Rome is now a much more stable and enjoyable product.

Rome has a number of very interesting political systems and is very military based, especially with Rome or Carthage where you can easily start with over 100k men (a huge feat in EU III), with huge potential to storm over the map in early stages. People complain about this, mainly because these actions in EU III would cause unrest and revolts, but they forget that Rome was very military driven and a great superpower of it's time in comparison to the dying Greek nations and barbarian states, and it was well within their power to do this. Rome also includes a very interesting system with your governors and generals, who if become too powerful and popular with the masses back in Rome (as was a legitimate concern for an Emperor), can lead their state and armies back upon the Imperium itself, which can be crippling when already defending against dirty barbarians! The Senate also provides a huge challenge in the form of opposing parties (again, as in Ancient Rome.)
My main complaints of Rome would be weaker AI in terms of military combat, although this is slightly hidden by the fact of so many units so it is much less noticeable. However, fighting on many fronts whilst rising to meet a civil war is easily one of the most intense strategic moments I've ever had in a game. Additionally there are fewer regions, (many many more than RTW) however all are historically accurate so to me this does not matter.

EU III is however for many people the defining Paradox game, the most polished, balanced in the genre. The focus is definitely more subtle and refined, with more complex economics and (imo less interesting) politics. The AI for this game is again, more refined and tactical in terms of military. The AI will takes into account many more factors when engaging in warfare, however this is completely necessary due to the vastly lower number of military units you would expect to see in a general game. This game definitely takes more planning and strategy to achieve goals as a wrong move can seriously set your aspirations back a long way. Empire building and planning is the forefront in this game, military takes a back seat (and often has to to advance successfully, so it isn't a bad thing.

I've tried both albeit not in the depth of many people who have answered already. To me, the time period you are most interested in ultimately decides which game you will enjoy the most as they are both incredibly accurate. Both are valid purchases and I recommend you try the both at some point.

TL;DR-

EU III has more polish, considered the best.
EU:R basically suffers due to Paradox trying to apply EU III concepts to the Roman era, although now it has been patched and expanded, and is much more enjoyable and finally a complete game.

[Benjamin Disraeli]

EU3 withou doubt.

[G-Megas-Doux]

Not played Rome, but get EUIII complete with Heir to the Throne.

[Ishoss]

EUIII

[Heavy Weapons Guy]

EUIII with Whole World Mod

[Doyle141]

EU3.

[nekako]

EU Rome have a better graphic than EU III,but EU III have more options and factions,
your choice.

[Bolkonsky]

What? EU3's graphics are the same as Rome's, plus with Divine Wind coming out, then you get way better graphics.

[zznɟ ǝɥʇ]

Rome's easier, and it finally has cool mods. I like Rome more but that's because I'm lazy. Also the characters are fun.

[Gatsby]

Get EUIII:Complete, then complete the now complete game with HTTT, then when DW arrives, complete your now completed complete game completely.

[Arto]

EU3, but I really liked the character system in Rome.

[The_Richini]

EU3 I would say atm. Rome greatly lacks expansions but is still pretty fun.

[Baron Thunder-ten-tronckh]

It is funny that the older game is more expensive than the newer game. That should tell you which one to pick

[Pat89]

It is funny that the older game is more expensive than the newer game. That should tell you which one to pick

Unles it includes the expansion packs of EU III