The constructive criticism thread *NO SANDALS ALLOWED*

[The High King of Ireland]

Hey everyone, I (as I'm sure many of you also are) am getting a little sick of the constant whining about things such as the bottom left pixel on a soldiers big toe having the wrong shade of colour (lets face it, we're not there yet, but that's where its going ) and wanted to hear some more constructive criticism that points out actual possible problems (AND NO, SANDALS DO NOT COUNT!!!) and (CTHULHU FORBID) might actually contain some positive feedback!

I'm gonna get the ball rolling by saying this: I'm liking that they're using warscape to represent individual tribes and city states as opposed to fictional coalitions, and also that they seem to be using more accurate unit rosters (for example: thureos spears [Thureophoroi, in other words]) however that brings me on to my own personal criticism: Over 500 units is a lot, but with 117 factions, I'm worried that it may translate into only 1 or 2 unique units per faction (excluding Rome) or else result in playables getting all the exclusives leaving NP factions with no real unique units (and thus making them somewhat boring to play as).

[Maleventum]

It' probably that similar factions will share in common most units : for example the several German tribes more or less will have the same units of the Suebi, so the other Gaul tribes will have the same units of the Arverni, but I think that's obvious 'cause there weren't many differences between two tribes of the same cultural group. Also the Hellenisticc kingdoms will share mostly the same units (pezetheri, Hethairoi, peltasts, thureophoroi etc) with the addition of local "unique" troops like the machimoi in Egypt, the Agrianoi in Macedonia/Epirus, the Syrians archers , Indian elephants , Arab camel archers for Seleucids.

[The Roman Republic]

Hey everyone, I (as I'm sure many of you also are) am getting a little sick of the constant whining about things such as the bottom left pixel on a soldiers big toe having the wrong shade of colour (lets face it, we're not there yet, but that's where its going ) and wanted to hear some more constructive criticism that points out actual possible problems (AND NO, SANDALS DO NOT COUNT!!!) and (CTHULHU FORBID) might actually contain some positive feedback!

I'm gonna get the ball rolling by saying this: I'm liking that they're using warscape to represent individual tribes and city states as opposed to fictional coalitions, and also that they seem to be using more accurate unit rosters (for example: thureos spears [Thureophoroi, in other words]) however that brings me on to my own personal criticism: Over 500 units is a lot, but with 117 factions, I'm worried that it may translate into only 1 or 2 unique units per faction (excluding Rome) or else result in playables getting all the exclusives leaving NP factions with no real unique units (and thus making them somewhat boring to play as).

Such a pointless thread, don't people ever think before they post a new thread.

[Anna_Gein]

Such a pointless thread, don't people ever think before they post a new thread.

Indeed. This sub-forum needs intensive cleaning.

[LaLaLand]

Arrow trails really. They do look like lazers in the current incarnation.

[The High King of Ireland]

It' probably that similar factions will share in common most units : for example the several German tribes more or less will have the same units of the Suebi, so the other Gaul tribes will have the same units of the Arverni, but I think that's obvious 'cause there weren't many differences between two tribes of the same cultural group. Also the Hellenisticc kingdoms will share mostly the same units (pezetheri, Hethairoi, peltasts, thureophoroi etc) with the addition of local "unique" troops like the machimoi in Egypt, the Agrianoi in Macedonia/Epirus, the Syrians archers , Indian elephants , Arab camel archers for Seleucids.

Thats more or less how i think it should be, I just dont want to see the minor kingdoms filling the map having their cultural base roster with no additional flair.

Such a pointless thread, don't people ever think before they post a new thread.

Nope, however I am getting sick of wading through tonnes of metaphorical excrement in the form of people whining about minor things which in any footage we've seen is pre-alpha or alpha (to my own knowledge, I could be wrong). I'd much rather create a thread for a more balanced critique, or at least one which cites more noteworthy flaws.

Arrow trails really. They do look like lazers in the current incarnation.

I agree. Whilst many problems (such as tunic button placement) are completely subjective (not to mention completely stupid to complain about) and only based on evidence that has been actually found (for all we know, they could have had tunics buttoned the way CA has modelled them too!) I am pretty sure arrows during the period of antiquity, much like arrows of the modern day, lacked laser like trails and they should be disable-able in the graphics options. (however I can see them as being useful to indicate my units firing or coming under fire more easily)

[perifanosEllinas]

Do completely wrong colours for factions count for you or not? Like for example faded black colour for Macedonia while in reality the Macedonians used blue,purple and red colours? Or the dark brown tunics for the Spartans who used only red in reality? Or you're more interested in unit types of factions?

Anyway,I'm not just whining for the sake of it.Ridiculously detailed stuff can be left out,agreed.It's just that the wrong colours for such famous factions destroy their atmosphere and massively reduce immersion into them.Your faction in a Total War game is not only population numbers or troops on the battlefield.A certain level of role playing is involved and the immersion and atmosphere of the faction are major factors for the faction's campaign experience.For me at least.So obviously wrong colours are a "turn off" actually.They make those factions look way less attractive for playing as them.

About the unit number.500 land units and 117 factions means 4,27 units per faction.I think it is unlikely for a faction (even minor unplayable one) to have only 4 units as its entire roster so reason suggests that a massive number of units will be shared among most factions.It would also be expected for the playables to have larger rosters than the unplayables.

That sounds like too few land units actually.And I also think that the truly unique units (not the same unit with different name) will be about 1 or 2 per faction,maybe a few more for the playables.So we agree on that.

The same goes for the sea units also.200 units and 117 factions means 1,7 sea unit per faction.If we consider that some factions might not have naval armies it is around 2 sea units per faction.

That's way too few also.It also means that a large number of units will be shared among many factions.

Some more notable problems really are the units constantly abandoning formations,very bad UI and even worse arrow trails.But we'll have to wait and see.I try to keep a positive mind for the game.When/If we see an actual gameplay video (not heavily scripted like the previous) then we'll be able to form a more valid opinion.For now we're just expressing concerns.

[Sun Jetzu]

Do completely wrong colours for factions count for you or not? Like for example faded black colour for Macedonia while in reality the Macedonians used blue,purple and red colours? Or the dark brown tunics for the Spartans who used only red in reality? Or you're more interested in unit types of factions?

I like that they kept the colors for the faction, reminiscent of Rome 1 total war. The colorful factions were one of my favorite features in that game.

[papoose]

This is not the house of congress, you have to admit these threads keep the forum breathing while new information comes out.

[BLITZCRAFT]

Hey everyone, I (as I'm sure many of you also are) am getting a little sick of the constant whining about things such as the bottom left pixel on a soldiers big toe having the wrong shade of colour (lets face it, we're not there yet, but that's where its going ) and wanted to hear some more constructive criticism that points out actual possible problems (AND NO, SANDALS DO NOT COUNT!!!) and (CTHULHU FORBID) might actually contain some positive feedback!

I'm gonna get the ball rolling by saying this: I'm liking that they're using warscape to represent individual tribes and city states as opposed to fictional coalitions, and also that they seem to be using more accurate unit rosters (for example: thureos spears [Thureophoroi, in other words]) however that brings me on to my own personal criticism: Over 500 units is a lot, but with 117 factions, I'm worried that it may translate into only 1 or 2 unique units per faction (excluding Rome) or else result in playables getting all the exclusives leaving NP factions with no real unique units (and thus making them somewhat boring to play as).

I actually read that there are over 700 diffrent units.

and are there really 117 factions? that would be awesome no more killing off rebels all the time now there might actually be only factions on the map instead of many rebels.
may i ask where did you get the information about 117 diffrent factions?

[Maleventum]

700 = land + naval units

[HusKatten]

I was pretty satisfied with the unit variety in Rome 1, it's even more varied than M2. And since 500 different units is the highest number of unique units to date i'm sure i'll be more than satisfied. Units will not vary much within the same culture, but it's the meeting of other cultures and their way to act and fight that is interesting to me and keeps the game going. The clash of cultures is what S2 is lacking,for me it felt like fighting a never ending revolution.

I can just say that i'm satisfied with everything so far.

[The Juggernaut]

A few criticisms from me:

1. No indication of supply being a major factor. Remember Julius Caesar defeated entire armies in Spain by simply cutting them off from supplies, and without major battle forced a large number of Pompeians to surrender or defect. To not make some sort of supply and attrition system would be very disappointing imo.

2. Arrow and Pilae trails. Although I'm sure they can be modded to be removed or reduced, CA should at least make this an option in the graphics. Reduced is best imo, I LIKE arrow trails! I can see them from far away when I'm managing something on the other end of the battle line, which may be CA's intention.

3. It's not out yet!!! Seriously, how am I supposed to wait until SEPTEMBER?!?! COME ON CA, WORK MOAR FASTLY!

EDIT: Oh yeah, and rep to the OP! We could definitely use a more positive environment around here!

[Kraxis]

2. Arrow and Pila trails. Although I'm sure they can be modded to be removed or reduced, CA should at least make this an option in the graphics. Reduced is best imo, I LIKE arrow trails! I can see them from far away when I'm managing something on the other end of the battle line, which may be CA's intention.

Yes, but they managed to show arrows and javelins quite well back in M2, and that was without trails (they were plenty visible from a distance). But trails are a given it seems, so at least let us have good trails, and not contrails like from a stratospheric air plane, especially the fire arrows that look like they are ancient rockets or something.

[Augustus Scipius]

The music so far sounds a bit laborous and uninspired, and mounted units lack combat animations completely as of now. Pretty minor flaws considering we do not have the final product before our eyes to pass judgement upon.

[Sharpe]

Faction colours are a must.

[Dan113112]

Well, from a realism aspect we can complain about tunics but CA already stated that faction colors are being used so they needed another shade of Red since Rome got the brighter shade (run-on sentence I know).

[Jokern]

I'm quite concerned how unit formations will be represented. I know CA have told us that they have added that as an attribute for certain units, but in retrospect to the older TW games and what we've seen so far of Rome II, I actually wonder how good units will hold formation and not become a blob of men, all trying to find an enemy to fight in mortal combat.

[torongill]

Even though my support of Rome 2 continues unwavering, I have some criticism of my own:

Rhodes was seen as a settlement in earlier images of the artistic representation, but has disappeared since. Despite my opposition to the view that Greece should have more regions "to reflect history", I think that Rhodes deserves to be a faction of its own and have a settlement. After all, the Rhodians resisted the greatest and scariest siege engines Mad scientists of the Ancient world could invent, had a large navy and commercial fleet and controlled the eastern gate to the Aegean.
Other than that it's only the arrow trails that I can think of, but I'm sure CA will do their superb job in the release.

[Aleron]

1. Projectile trails. Seriously, that just looks dumb. I mean, they are very helpful from a gameplay point of view, considering the new 'true line of sight', but they look really bad.
2. Roman testudo shown in that last video. I mean, seriously, what the **** is that? I mean, I guess that kind of thing can be useful when you need to advance somewhere really really fast and sustain as few casualties from projectiles as possible, but man, I wish the 'classic' testudo was still in

That's pretty much it for me, everything else shown to date is very impressive