Where should I begin? First of, I must say that I had great expectations (didn't we all?) regarding this game. Some came true, many didn't, all in all it's a mixed basket of emotions that I have gone through this last two days. I have started two campaings, one with Athens and one with the Arverni, both on legendary. After about 100 turns into the Athens one and 50 of Gallic conquest, I decided that I have enough informations to compile a preety accurate opinion of the game. The good: 1) Diplomacy actually makes sense. The CAI seems to behave rationally and to some extent seems able to make a clear judgement regarding his faction's situation. For example, as Athens, I have landed on the island of Knossos and declared war. After landing, the AI proposed a peace treaty and a payment of 1350 denars, seeing as my army was far superior to his. Also, getting on the good syde of the AI controlled factions requires more effort from the player's side, but once a good relationship has been estabilished you can count on the AI to act in accordance (treaties, coordinated war efforts and so on) making it meaningful to preserve diplomatic ties with a faction instead of simply conquering it. Not too bad, not too bad. 2) The province system. Yes, it is not realist at all to limit building oportunities to 6 respectively 4 slots, but this opens up a lot of strategic perspective and long term planning. Do I want a military center? Will I have enough food to sustain it? Must I capture another region in order to turn Athens into a military hub? Decisions, decisions. 3) New army stances. Usefull and quite well thought off. Mostly I used forced march, cause I didn't want to invest in the strategist skill tree and defensive position (or whatever it's called) to guard key points of the map. 4) Diversity. Indeed, the size and diligence they put into making the ancient world come to life is astonishing. As a history buff, I was pleased to see a preety good representation of the political situation of the world. The only problem is that factions that should have been extremely large and powerful (e.g. Carthage, The Seleucids) are represented through a system of client states instead of an actual Empire, which they really were. 5) CPU optimization. I have been pleasantly surprised to see that the game uses all the eight cores of my FX-8320. Quite a massive improvement from the Shogun II laung days. The bad: 1) The hoplite phalanx ... are you ing kidding me? It is, sort to speak, a "shamefur display" from CA's part. One of the most groundbreaking formations of antiquity is: a) ill respresented - no overlaping shields, no overhand spears and b) it CAN'T ATTACK - once you issue the attack order it breaks into a disorderly mob 2) The BAI is quite peculiar. Why do I say this? In some battles it's mechanics seem to be working quite well (in the siege of Bibracte the AI defended quite well, tried to create local superiority, defended it's plaza and even succeded in destroying one of my attack squads - 2 spearmen levy and a group of slingers). On the other hand there are times when it sees to be braindead, as if the stimulus that should trigger it's reaction is not working. 3) Battles are too short and this is not due to the AI, but as someone pointed out, due to the poorly balanced stats of the units. This, of course, can be modded, but it will take a titanic effort to restore balance to the whole system. 4) No guard mode. That's it. I got nothing more on the topic, as it speaks for itself. Legionaries and hoplites not being able to maintatin formation is just dumb and in total contradiction with the historical fact. 5) Fire at will mode for infantry. Same as before. 6) Shield and HP implementation. Someone needs to clarify how it works, for it is not realistic at all. Not to mention that while every formation should take some casualities when attacked by missile troops from the front, it would be hardly possible to destroy a phalanx using slingers and javelinmen in such a manner. 7) Armies can travel seas without navy support ... absolute rubbish, both from a logical point of view and as far as gameplay mechanics go. Why the hell invest in a navy then? Apparently you can find a handful of sailors and some deserted ships on every sea cost. The ugly: 1) UI. At first I wasn't impressed, but it started to grow on me. The problem is that it's quite hard to distinguish between different unit cards in the heat of battle, especially when playing on legendary difficulty. 2) No family tree means that the faction you are playing looses it's flesh and bones. I think they did it in order to addres the shortage of generals issue, but in doing so they have taken away a huge part of the game. 3) Army traditions. Quite repetitive, as it is really easy to flesh out an optimal tradition tree for each faction, depending on it's unit roster rather then the use of said military force. Conclusion: In the end I have only one thing to say: the foundation is good, but the edifice is quite shabby. Hopefully, with the release of many patches and the work of our wonderful modding community we will be able to enjoy Rome II as it should have been launched by Christmas time. Now, I'll be going back to Roma Surrectum 2,6 and my fledgeling Syracusan empire. Rome 2, see you in 3 months.