Everything Rome 1 had that Rome 2 doesn't

[Aeimnestus]

I've been playing Rome 2 off and on. While I could play the original Rome (And M2TW for that matter) for hours upon hours, when I play Rome 2 I just get bored within the hour. All the little things I could do in Rome; customizing the buildings in my cities, managing the family tree, building a line of watchtowers and fortresses to help keep a strong hostile nation in check....all gone. Basically they took all the in-depth "empire management" away, and turned it into a bland simplified arcade game and it even fails at that with the bizarre AI and absence of unit collision, making the battles while prettier less enjoyable than those in the previous TW games.

[stackero]

I've been playing Rome 2 off and on. While I could play the original Rome (And M2TW for that matter) for hours upon hours, when I play Rome 2 I just get bored within the hour. All the little things I could do in Rome; customizing the buildings in my cities, managing the family tree, building a line of watchtowers and fortresses to help keep a strong hostile nation in check....all gone. Basically they took all the in-depth "empire management" away, and turned it into a bland simplified arcade game and it even fails at that with the bizarre AI and absence of unit collision, making the battles while prettier less enjoyable than those in the previous TW games.

Aeimnestus, you now belong to a very large majority of people who feel as you do.

Peace and good gaming.

[Whistler118]

Do you reckon that after the failure of Rome 2 they will build a new game engine? And if so will they release comprehensive modding tools for the old Engine so Rome 2, Shogun 2, Napoleon and Empire can be completely changed?

[stackero]

Do you reckon that after the failure of Rome 2 they will build a new game engine? And if so will they release comprehensive modding tools for the old Engine so Rome 2, Shogun 2, Napoleon and Empire can be completely changed?

A new engine? From CA. Maybe. If they hire someone who knows how. As for the rest, again I say, get those letters into Santa early.

Good gaming.

[GussieFinkNottle]

Final bump
Any last thoughts on the comparison?

[stackero]

Final bump
Any last thoughts on the comparison?

I don't need to comment more here, you know me.
But this was a good thread GussieFinkNottle, I congratulate you. Inspired alot of good and not so good debates.But it was good while it lasted.

Peace and good tidings.

[leonardusius]

Yeap, just my 2 cents: so long time to develop Rome II and so much (good) features from RTW not present in RTW2, makes me thinking that CA taked a (bad) decision to let modders fight to take them back. For me it's an incredible lack of vision.

[AngryTitusPullo]

Final bump
Any last thoughts on the comparison?

Rome 1 had clone armies.

[dvk901]

Rome II has zombie armies. So what?

[LordInvictus]

Rome II has zombie armies. So what?

Which were seen on low settings...And have been fixed...

[dvk901]

Which were seen on low settings...And have been fixed...

I know...I was just joking.

[Huberto]

Which were seen on low settings...And have been fixed...

When a faction has lost all its territory, usually because it couldn't be arsed to defend it, it wanders around, usually on the water, presumably looking for a new homeland and gradually suffering attrition until it is eliminated. These are the true "zombie armies" and they are legion in Rome II.

[GussieFinkNottle]

When a faction has lost all its territory, usually because it couldn't be arsed to defend it, it wanders around, usually on the water, presumably looking for a new homeland and gradually suffering attrition until it is eliminated. These are the true "zombie armies" and they are legion in Rome II.

These do happen, but seem to me to be a patching issue. My problems are all those listed core features (unpatchable) as well as all the minor features around the side that enhanced the game but weren't essential (e.g. city view).

[AngryTitusPullo]

Rome II has zombie armies. So what?

I didn't mention that because it's off-topic. This thread is about what RTW have and TWR2 didn't have.

[General Maximus]

Allowed change of capitals?
Dynamic trade routes?
Roads that actually look proper and work in battle?
Roads that can be actually built by the player?

[crzyrndm]

Roads that can be actually built by the player?

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=214799568

Have fun

[Zaar]

gosh, how i missed the visible armour effects....absolut the best!!

[Petroniu]

TO THE OP:
Rome 1 had cities that could build walls - Rome 2 has only a select few. Rome 1 had replayability - Rome 2 does not (let me explain on this: if with every faction that has a roster of 50 units from which I usually use 12 I have to conquer each time the entire map, by the time I get to the last factions I am bored to death because even though I change the faction, the challenge is the same!). Rome 1 had short campaigns for people that are casually playing the game - Rome 2 does not. In Rome 1 it took 150 years - aka 300 turns to conquer the entire map (if one would really want that but in Rome 2 is almost compulsory) while in Rome 2 it takes also 150 years but! aka 150 turns! (why? because after the initial 10-15 turns challenge this game is too easy - the AI is retarded!)

Rome 1 had a lot of shortcomings but it still has a 92 metacritic score while Rome 2 has only 76 metacritic score and for the guys at CA who released this game based on metacritic scores, this should ING SAY SOMETHING TO THEM!

[Johnstathan]

TO THE OP:
Rome 1 had cities that could build walls - Rome 2 has only a select few. Rome 1 had replayability - Rome 2 does not (let me explain on this: if with every faction that has a roster of 50 units from which I usually use 12 I have to conquer each time the entire map, by the time I get to the last factions I am bored to death because even though I change the faction, the challenge is the same!). Rome 1 had short campaigns for people that are casually playing the game - Rome 2 does not. In Rome 1 it took 150 years - aka 300 turns to conquer the entire map (if one would really want that but in Rome 2 is almost compulsory) while in Rome 2 it takes also 150 years but! aka 150 turns! (why? because after the initial 10-15 turns challenge this game is too easy - the AI is retarded!)

Rome 1 had a lot of shortcomings but it still has a 92 metacritic score while Rome 2 has only 76 metacritic score and for the guys at CA who released this game based on metacritic scores, this should ING SAY SOMETHING TO THEM!

To be fair, "replayability" is a really subjective term.

[GussieFinkNottle]

TO THE OP:
Rome 1 had cities that could build walls - Rome 2 has only a select few. Rome 1 had replayability - Rome 2 does not (let me explain on this: if with every faction that has a roster of 50 units from which I usually use 12 I have to conquer each time the entire map, by the time I get to the last factions I am bored to death because even though I change the faction, the challenge is the same!). Rome 1 had short campaigns for people that are casually playing the game - Rome 2 does not. In Rome 1 it took 150 years - aka 300 turns to conquer the entire map (if one would really want that but in Rome 2 is almost compulsory) while in Rome 2 it takes also 150 years but! aka 150 turns! (why? because after the initial 10-15 turns challenge this game is too easy - the AI is retarded!)

Rome 1 had a lot of shortcomings but it still has a 92 metacritic score while Rome 2 has only 76 metacritic score and for the guys at CA who released this game based on metacritic scores, this should ING SAY SOMETHING TO THEM!

Thanks for input, I'm afraid all your points are already in the OP, except for replayability which I can't add because of its subjectivity. I would, however, dispute your claim that the Rome 2 map takes fewer turns to conquer: It is physically larger and so are your enemies' armies. My record for taking the whole map in Rome 1 was 31 turns (vanilla). The best I have managed so far in Rome 2 is 86, 31 would be physically impossible without cheats. I believe the Total War record is 14 turns for Medieval 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1pfi...0dsLIRCOj8jvP_