what exacly is the diffrence between RS and EB?

[Toho]

im little curious what the diffrence between these two mods are.

[Ferdiad]

EB is History in a game.
RS II is beauty in a game.
Really they are similar but at the same time very different.

[the.phoenix]

im little curious what the diffrence between these two mods are.

i think this should help

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=422057

[Dramatic Cat]

EB has been the Uber mod for RTW since liek five years. Its got history to the teeth, its got custom voices for each faction, its scripted liek hell, its very complicated if youre new to it (liek meh) its simply amazing.

BUT RSII has graphics and game play compared to NO other RTW mod. And it has 28 unique roman legions!!!!!!!!eleven!1

[Ferdiad]

I say that EB actually tries to force players to play historically, unlike RS where you can do whatever after turn 1.

[Toho]

and how is the speed of the game? when i played EB the game was just so freaking slow.
the turns, the troop movement the screen movement. (battles were fine though but the map had too many trees.)

[Salahedin]

and how is the speed of the game? when i played EB the game was just so freaking slow.
the turns, the troop movement the screen movement. (battles were fine though but the map had too many trees.)

well I play with a crapy laptop and that's the main reason I don't play EB anymore.
With RSII I experience more lag during battles than with EB, playing with huge units, but lowest other settings. Understandable though because it looks better... well it looks awesome with low settings (if you can stand the lag huhu).
The main problem with EB was the loooooooong time waiting for the loading screens, I needed amost 10 minutes just to load the game, and the end turn used to last 5-6 minutes also. Well this is much better with RSII and everything works faster even with 448mb RAM (yeah, I know, it's even worse than "crapy" ^^).

[Ferdiad]

You must have a bad computer then.

[Ferdiad]

I would be proud that I managed to run the game with that much RAM.

[Dramatic Cat]

EBs campaign map is a lot moar detailed than RSIIs

but the battle map enviroments and unit skins (even the not high-res ones) for RSII are wayyy bettur than EBs.

thats wai ppl get moar lag in the campaign map with EB, and others get lag in-battles with RSII.

[Ferdiad]

EBs campaign map is a lot moar detailed than RSIIs

but the battle map enviroments and unit skins (even the not high-res ones) for RSII are wayyy bettur than EBs.

thats wai ppl get moar lag in the campaign map with EB, and others get lag in-battles with RSII.

No, just no.

[Dramatic Cat]

yes it is

[Ferdiad]

yes it is

No it's not, the quality is inferior.

[ChampionEuropa]

No it's not, the quality is inferior.

Yes, the quality of Europa Barbarorum's campaign map is inferior to Roma Surrectum's.

On a side note, I prefer RS to EB as I find RS more fun and more immersive. It is plenty historical for my taste, and EB tends to be not as pretty graphically, and somewhat overwhelming with the amount of units. Plus, I often find myself with not enough units, although that might be my incompetence.

I installed Europa Barbaroum first, played it a bit, then tried Roma Surrectum and was BLOWN AWAY.

RSII=>9000 on Awesome Scale

[Populus Romanus]

No it's not, the quality is inferior.

And what makes you say this? What is there that is "superior" about RSII that cannot be nullified by EB's superiority in another? To me, they seem very balanced.

[RebelCub]

EB's battles are much more decisive imo. The stack spam, even on 1 turn, in RSII just drives me insane.

dozens of massive-ass armies were not constantly attacking people and sieging cities every single year back in antiquity. Don't get me wrong, I love fighting battles, but if I'm going to spend 45 minutes of my time fighting one then I'd hope that it actually matters in the game.

EB with RSII environments is what I've been playing for a long time now.

[tone]

And what makes you say this? What is there that is "superior" about RSII that cannot be nullified by EB's superiority in another? To me, they seem very balanced.

Agreed, but the discussion there was about the campaign map, not the whole mod.



On another note, so far this has been a good, well balanced discussion, but these things often get out of hand and people start posting inflammatory comments so we'll be ready to stop it if necessary.

[Ferdiad]

And what makes you say this? What is there that is "superior" about RSII that cannot be nullified by EB's superiority in another? To me, they seem very balanced.

Dude did you even read our convo?The campaign map is graphically inferior.

I was going through EB's eastern faction previews, especially the Indian units. it is good in patches but the unit accuracy and historical background is generally . not at all upto the standard claimed by EB. in a way it's good they have left India out in EB2 because they were clearly out of their depth.

So your an actual Historian then?

[Boom S]

So your an actual Historian then?

I'm not sure what an 'actual' historian is, if you mean my profession then I'm not.
but I do have a little knowledge of history, especially the sub-continent. you can check my posts on the topic in RTR sub-mod forums, Fortuna Orbis and ExRM.

[Dramatic Cat]

hmm, i wonder why my older pc lagged liek hell at it. couldnt raise the resolution to 1440x900 or higher...