Rome 2 Total War thoughts

[MortalCoil]

So I just got Rome 2 and have been playing it a LOT and I have got to say i'm kind of underwhelmed by it... Honestly I like Stainless Steel better which is kind of sad >.> Anyone else have thoughts?

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

I havent played it, and probably wont anytime soon because of my crappy specs, I dont want to be dissapointed both by my ancient pc's performance and the bad mechanics.

That being said, I am feeling better knowing that rome 2 is pretty bad at release, I will hopefully get to experience a much better rome 2 with mods and patches that fix the bad aspects of the game.

[napoleonic]

OP, tell us how does rome 2 compared to SS? in detail please

[Shaun]

From what almost everyone is saying it seems to be a bit of a catastrophe. I'm very glad I didn't pre-order it as although my PC meets the minimum specs, from what's reported there is no way I'd actually be able to run it.

Initially I thought the mods and patches could eventually fix it but from reading more about it, it seems like the fundamentals of the game are simply too dumbed down or broken to be salvaged. For example, in battles, I've read that there is no now longer a guard mode button (which itself was a simplified version of the hold formation and hold position button from MTW) so your formations just deform into a blob, there is no fire-at-will toggle for javelin infantry, so they often throw volley after volley into the backs of your own men if you have them behind your lines, the loose formation has been removed, battles are way, way too ing fast (see vids on Youtube of units routing a few seconds after impact), etc. etc. etc.

No, it just doesn't look like this game is salvageable. I doubt they'll totally remove the capture the flag aspect, which it really looks like they need to do as it makes the AI do some really horrendously stupid things. They removed the family tree system and apparently there is no obvious or easy way to see who is your leader, his heir, and who is related to who. And also the limit on armies seems to have completely failed to stop the AI from using lots of little, underpowered armies rather than a big single force - which if they do use is largely comprised of slingers or skirmishers.

I do hope I'm wrong though. I would love to be able to look back on this post in a year's time and say "Shaun, you didn't even have the ing game, why are you writing all that , the game's brilliant now and the mods make it even better!"

[napoleonic]

From what almost everyone is saying it seems to be a bit of a catastrophe. I'm very glad I didn't pre-order it as although my PC meets the minimum specs, from what's reported there is no way I'd actually be able to run it.

Initially I thought the mods and patches could eventually fix it but from reading more about it, it seems like the fundamentals of the game are simply too dumbed down or broken to be salvaged. For example, in battles, I've read that there is no now longer a guard mode button (which itself was a simplified version of the hold formation and hold position button from MTW) so your formations just deform into a blob, there is no fire-at-will toggle for javelin infantry, so they often throw volley after volley into the backs of your own men if you have them behind your lines, the loose formation has been removed, battles are way, way too ing fast (see vids on Youtube of units routing a few seconds after impact), etc. etc. etc.

No, it just doesn't look like this game is salvageable. I doubt they'll totally remove the capture the flag aspect, which it really looks like they need to do as it makes the AI do some really horrendously stupid things. They removed the family tree system and apparently there is no obvious or easy way to see who is your leader, his heir, and who is related to who. And also the limit on armies seems to have completely failed to stop the AI from using lots of little, underpowered armies rather than a big single force - which if they do use is largely comprised of slingers or skirmishers.

I do hope I'm wrong though. I would love to be able to look back on this post in a year's time and say "Shaun, you didn't even have the ing game, why are you writing all that , the game's brilliant now and the mods make it even better!"

can't believe how they keep degrading the battle aspect since m2tw... this sound like there is no longer total war game instead we get ancient versions of company of heroes or something.

how does the archery work in rome 2 though? is it any better than shogun 2 (especially the famous physics defying no height advantage thing)? I'd expect no improvement though, lol.

[KoalaAkbar]

Well, basically,


Total War: Rome 2


MTW2 Stainless Steel


Moral of the story: Stick with SS. (can't believe I pre-ordered TWR2...)

[Navajo Joe]

THIS THREAD IS OFF TOPIC AS THIS IS NOT RTW2 FORUM, HOWEVER I WILL LEAVE THIS THREAD OPEN ON THE BASIS OF CLEAR COMPARISON BETWEEN SS AND RTW2, IF NOT I WILL CLOSE

[Strengelicher]

Gamestar, Germany's no. 1 PC game magazine, rates Rome II 89/100. However, in the breakdown rating of individual aspects, the AI only gets 5/10. Personally, I find the AI more important than eg graphics. I will continue playing SS 6.4 for a while, but will probably buy Rome II when it has been patched and modded to my liking.

[achilles-91]

i agree, i also think stainles steel is better then rome 2.. it's just one large bug for me..AI is like funny..
looking forward to TITANIUM submod.. i think it would be released this month

[Andytheplatypus]

I'm making a comprehensive list of pro's and con's of Rome 2 compared to upcoming Titanium. Ill finish it in the next day or so and post it in the titanium forum.

[Vissewalde rex de Gerzika]

I'm making a comprehensive list of pro's and con's of Rome 2 compared to upcoming Titanium. Ill finish it in the next day or so and post it in the titanium forum.

This will be interesting to see

[Strengelicher]

I'm making a comprehensive list of pro's and con's of Rome 2 compared to upcoming Titanium. Ill finish it in the next day or so and post it in the titanium forum.

Don't. You would not want to create the impression that MIITW mods are competition for current CA titles. People will value Titanium regardless of how it compares to Rome II vanilla.

[Risasi]

I think it's kind of funny how nearly every mod now has a thread forum comparing R2 with their mod. Hands down it's not a fair fight, and obviously every fan of their pet mod will find a reason to choose the "inferior" aged TW engine + mod rather than the new and "improved" vanilla Rome II (and in a sense it will be a valid argument, we are talking about tastes rather than an apples to apples comparison).

With that said I'm not sure how you compare SS to R2. They are two completely different ages. This is all pretty subjective. Me personally, I like the Roman age best, and why I'm a big RSII fan...but SS is sooo good. I also have it installed. So I pick two.
Technically I pick three. I also have Empire + Darthmod installed too, for my Indian fix. That's the beauty here, you don't have to pick between R2 or SS, unless you are low on drive space or your system is too weak.
And abstractly speaking I believe nearly all mods, regardless of engine, will have more strategic and tactical "depth" because their DNA is to fix perceived shortcomings with the vanilla game.
As it stands I think a better comparison between SS and Rome 2 perhaps 3-9 months from now, once it has several patches under its belt and a fleshed out mod (hopefully). Shaun has a very good distilled list of the shortcomings on the R2 engine. And I have a feeling he is right about them being able to address the shortcomings, but I hope we are wrong.

I think what we will end up with is a cleaned up, but superficial strategy game in vanilla R2 a year from now. It's not necessarily a bad thing, just a different focus. Not my cup of tea, but so be it. I'll admit to no longer being CA's target customer. As to whether or not a mod can address the bad ideas (capture points in open field battles, for example), that remains to be seen. And so, unless Rome 2 is drastically changed I believe for years to come my focus will be on playing RSII (or perhaps switching to EB II when it comes out), SS and 1648. Plus some ETW+Darthmod for a change of pace from time to time.

One thing I found interesting when some in the Rome 2 general forum were comparing SS vs. Rome 2, it was nearly unanimous that when zoomed out people thought M2 and specifically with SS had better graphics compared to Rome 2. I was thinking that was crazy, but they might have a valid point. Linky: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...l-over-my-eyes

[MortalCoil]

Sorry for the late response! Any way for me one of the biggest differences between the SS and Rome 2 is that there's a complete lack of a family tree (or else one that is mentioned very rarely). You never really get attached to you generals either... in rome if one of them dies you just conjure up another one with random stats. One of my favorite things to do in SS was to groom a general/family member to be like a city builder or a dread lord kind of thing.

Additionally the AI in SS is way better in terms of battle ai and campaign map ai. I play with the gracul ai and with most factions I always have my back against the wall. One little error and the house of cards comes tumbling down with gracul! With Rome the factions don't really ever seem to attack... you can just kind of sit in your home provinces build up until you're ready to attack then do so with little consequence. Very rarely do declarations of war in RTW2 bring anything more than a few coastal settlements raided : /. In battle one of the things i loved with SS (with reallybadai ) is that the ai will aggressively defends thier flanks from cav, RTW2 only does it some of the time.

And of course the bugs.... pretty much you get ships sailing through land and other texture glitches like that... it just boggles the mind that a few guys skilled at coding could mod a game to look as good as SS with almost no bugs and the folks at CA are getting paid the big bucks and they release this buggy garbage. I am figuring its gonna to be patched and fixed up but until then im sticking with SS <3

[Fatecheater]

Rome 2 is very much empty in terms of gameplay. Its graphic is great, but it's just a nice cover for an average book. Futhermore, many of the features I love from M2TW have been taken off the game (for reasons I can't comprehence). If I have to compare, I must say SS, though has its flaws in gameplay also, is much more enjoyable to play.

[S.P.Q.R. Praetorian]

Having played both R2 and SS quite extensively, I will say that it is mostly apples to oranges difference in many aspects. R2 in many ways no long feels like a TW, just in terms of feel and gameplay. I like the new art style and campaign setup but it is missing the classic feel and aspects that made R1 and M2 great. About the only two things I like in R2 campaign over previous TW is the garrison system and province management(where you can click around and find different settlements and what they have built easily). As for overall feel R1 and R2 are both "enlightening" games for lack of better wording. M2 feels like a dark and sort of depressing game even with many different mods. This is not a bad thing but it is something worth mentioning nonetheless.

Army management and recruitment is absolutely a pain in the ace and terrible in R2. I liked the old simple recruitment system better although I realize some people get really hung up with the new "XP" style armies with R2. I think it is a farce that you could max your army XP out, load a bunch of n00bs into that army, then rick roll other armies with it. That feels like COD to me. The new city building system is absolute crap IMO. Only being able to build 6 buildings for a capital city and 4 for a small city?! PFFFF. They dumbed this down for COD n00bs that don't like challenges and can't make decisions on what to build. Simple should never be used in the same sentence as Total War.

If you liked Shoguns art style, then you would probably like R2 art as well since is has a very similar feel to it. As I said before, I like it, but I preferred the old style such as M2. It gives more "individuality" to the units and makes them easier to identify. Battles also feel like Shogun as well. The fighting animations are not as fancy as S2 but I do not like the 1v1 engagement system. I like older where multiple units can gang up and murder one guy.

Should you pay $60 for it? If you like a arcade experience(Shogun 2, cough cough) with simple mechanics compared to previous TW then yes, otherwise don't waste your money. Hold out to Steam Christmas sale when it is 60% off. I have played TW games since R1 demo released and have enjoyed them all. I am also not bashing R2 as I have had a lot of fun with it, but right now it is unfinished and even when it is patched, it will not feel like the classic TWs.

[Faith]

i feel like CA abandoned me. they went with other people's preferences... let me try to list them

highlight all units and right click win ftw combat system
characters without any character
management streamlining so you don't have to think
5 minute battles
ranged units have robotic precision
1v1 fight scenes rather than 1000v1000 fight scenes

i do not share these preferences

[Joshua the Bear]

That feels like COD to me.

I think we need to invoke a new law. The more turns a franchise takes, the probability of it being compared to CoD approaches 1.

The new city building system is absolute crap IMO. Only being able to build 6 buildings for a capital city and 4 for a small city?! PFFFF. They dumbed this down for COD n00bs that don't like challenges and can't make decisions on what to build. Simple should never be used in the same sentence as Total War.

This seems like an Contradictio in terminis. Shogun 2's method of limiting the amount of buildings you could build in a settlement forces you to make choices. As opposed to MED2, which basically only let you decide on build orders (especially with the massive amounts of money you could aquire in the vanilla game - partly because you could just build everything with almost reckless abandon). It only increases the amount of challenges and choices you have to make.

[Duck of Death]

1 day of playing Rome II... and Im right back to playing SS today... so Im happy and sad

For one thing, there is still no semblance of a royal family... how can you have fun building a dynasty??
The maps and gameplay (while visually better looking obviously) are more annoying then anything. I have to click 3-4 different buttons just to view a generals "card" which is almost bare.
The whole thing is really just like they took Empire (back before they fixed it as much as they could) and just changed the dates and untis. And the units... on the battlefeild fine, but on the campaign map, they are just crudel drawings.

There's no sense of immersion to the game. I feel like Im just doing work. Im sad cause I was really looking forward to the game... but, alas, Im back to SS today and much happier playing it.

So grats again to the whole SS team... your great and passionate work on a 7 year old game is still way more fun then the newest thing

Now I guess Ill just keep hoping that 7.0 still comes out at some point.

[Faith]

This seems like an Contradictio in terminis. Shogun 2's method of limiting the amount of buildings you could build in a settlement forces you to make choices. As opposed to MED2, which basically only let you decide on build orders (especially with the massive amounts of money you could aquire in the vanilla game - partly because you could just build everything with almost reckless abandon). It only increases the amount of challenges and choices you have to make.

no, just no...

you cannot build every building available in 1 turn. it takes centuries to build everything IF you have the income. there is something called a build order. shogun 2's method is akin to the simplification of dawn of to to dawn of war 2. not sure if games are getting dumber, or if i'm getting smarter...
if you wanted your settlement to focus on religion, you would have to spend decades waiting for that building tree to be built. you could focus on other specializations in other settlements. if you're prosperous enough, after an exceptional amount of time, you'll have all trees completed in all settlements. more buildings would have been an improvement to a "strategy" franchise, while reducing the buildings has amounted to the opposite.

i just LOVED building only a market and inn in farming settlements in shogun2, and leaving it at that forever throughout the game. my castle cities were just as simple: dojos and a camp. my settlements needed only a tiny bit of care, and the rest of the time was a forced steamroll of the map with stack spam.

total war is not longer a "strategy" franchise, at least when it comes to how i define strategy.