Everything Rome 1 had that Rome 2 doesn't

[Durnaug]

formation fighting instead of blobbing

Just wanted to extract and highlight this one on the list. Without proper formations you don't have a TW game - half the game is the battle engine, the heart of any Total War experience. Combine this with the bad AI and the silly speeds and you see why many disliked R2TW battles, the essence of the game for crissakes.

Now I hear the patches improve things on this level, i.e. cohesion and formations...

*ducks*

[SD_Man]

Dont forget about the sick MedII death animations. Not those one-on-ones currently available
MedII=Short,concise,believable
RomeII=WTF!?! Why are they just standing there!?!?!

[Dago Red]

I too would spend all night barely going 2 turns during some sessions of RTR: AE. There was so much to do, so much rich history to learn and read about and so many plans to hatch.

If you can't understand that, then you just don't value what's there -- which is already pretty apparent from some posters here. It's a sad day when you realize how backwards things have become. CA decided to cater to an audience that doesn't think too deeply in order to generate more sales.

It backfired harder than any game release in my lifetime thus far. These lists spell it out how vapid and hollow this series has just become very clearly.

[RogueLeader]

I hope you will post this over on the Total War Forums that would help to explain to many there why the lack of immersion is so difficult for the Veterans of Rome 1.

[Jigggler]

I too would spend all night barely going 2 turns during some sessions of RTR: AE. There was so much to do, so much rich history to learn and read about and so many plans to hatch.

If you can't understand that, then you just don't value what's there -- which is already pretty apparent from some posters here. It's a sad day when you realize how backwards things have become. CA decided to cater to an audience that doesn't think too deeply in order to generate more sales.

It backfired harder than any game release in my lifetime thus far. These lists spell it out how vapid and hollow this series has just become very clearly.

+10. Some people are just Easy-mode players that's why they cannot understand what are you talking about.

[jamreal18]

The options are:

-I find Rome Total War a deeper, more immersive experience

-I find Total War: Rome II a deeper, more immersive experience
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet, you only give the good qualities of Rome 1..... You should also give the good qualities of Rome 2....

This thread is biased to Rome 1....

[GussieFinkNottle]

The options are:

-I find Rome Total War a deeper, more immersive experience

-I find Total War: Rome II a deeper, more immersive experience
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet, you only give the good qualities of Rome 1..... You should also give the good qualities of Rome 2....

This thread is biased to Rome 1....

If you had read the thread, you would notice there is a parallel thread with all the qualities of Rome 2 linked in the OP in only the 6th sentence, and quoted in the second half of the OP. What you just posted is plain wrong

[Medina]

This poll already shows clearly that CA failed to deliver, bigtime.

[PeonKing]

This poll already shows clearly that CA failed to deliver, bigtime.

You realize this poll, at this point, only had 151 people vote on it? I mean I don't know the exact projections of how many people bought the game, but it was a hell of a lot more than 151 people. It's not a conclusive of the whole playerbase, maybe of a select few of the more outspoken fans. But, as I saw earlier, it also apparently consisted of some people, at least one poster, who played the game for 30 minutes and then deemed it an unfixable failure, so they're is probably a lot of bias from people who let their minds be decided by reviews as well.

I actually also think they failed to deliver what they hyped, but I still have fun playing the game and I don't regret purchasing it.

[john duca]

Rome 1 and M2TW are and will remain forever the best total war games..so many features , mods and epic feelings..
Now , well, we have semi-finished game , with less than a half of the features of the recent total war games, and the content is not free..you have to buy DLC now in order to have basic effects and factions.

[GussieFinkNottle]

Stackero, I value your opinion but please could you not hijack this thread by posting an enormous number of times or replying to every post. Half the posts in the other R1/R2 comparison thread were yours. Please do post your main points, but let's have a diversity of opinion, eh?

[stackero]

Stackero, I value your opinion but please could you not hijack this thread by posting an enormous number of times or replying to every post. Half the posts in the other R1/R2 comparison thread were yours. Please do post your main points, but let's have a diversity of opinion, eh?

I shall comply with your request and retire. Good thread.

[Fallen Phalangite]

Nostalgeacd hard reading that list. So many good memories; so sad that the heir to Caesar turned about to be a right dud . +1

[alQamar]

good thread but I guess some fans will discuss things down and will field reasons why things are so different. CA did that, why should some community member fail to do it same way

here is some more food for your thread

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...nt-from-Rome-1

[GussieFinkNottle]

good thread but I guess some fans will discuss things down and will field reasons why things are so different. CA did that, why should some community member fail to do it same way

here is some more food for your thread

http://forums.totalwar.com/showthrea...nt-from-Rome-1

Thanks, I've added it to the OP

[General Maximus]

I agree with every point in the OP.

This game, in my opinion, is a piece of trash. So many great features removed, so much immersion thrown into dust...it is just a game made for those uncaring apologists who roamed the forum before release (some still are doing so), who don't care one bit about immersion or anything and seek quick lazy arcade-style wins, and just say that 'the game has already got core, what else do you want' to us.

+rep when I get the opportunity.

[craziii]

walls in rome 1 are 100% tie to settlement/city size. I understand it is a big list and op might get some things wrong.

also, try not to include opinions into the list, when 1/3 of the points on your list are opinions, it will be kinda hard for others to take it seriously. I like some of the points though. especially the guard mode and fire at will for pilas on infantry units. I absolutely disagree on your opinion of the replenishment feature, 1000% opposite.

[GussieFinkNottle]

walls in rome 1 are 100% tie to settlement/city size. I understand it is a big list and op might get some things wrong.

No they are not. While you do have to have a bigger city to have the largest walls, you can have a huge city with no walls or only a wooden palisade, and a minor city with stone walls, it gives you more freedom and settlement diversity than automatically upgrading them with settlement size increases

I make it clear with a qualifier which points are opinions, but I take your point, maybe I will move the opinions all into one separate block, but they are based on my perception of actual differences, which are facts. You may like them, or you may not, and occasionally I have stated which side I am on, but emphasise this is my personal viewpoint

Thanks for your post, my main problem with the unit replenishment is not the system but the speed: it only takes 1 or 2 turns to recover devastating losses, even of mercenaries and elite troops. This may be realistic because of 1tpy but destroys the significance of casualties gameplay-wise, and is much much faster than NTW and S2TW, where retraining was replaced well but you had to minimize casualties

[craziii]

No they are not. While you do have to have a bigger city to have the largest walls, you can have a huge city with no walls or only a wooden palisade, and a minor city with stone walls, it gives you more freedom and settlement diversity than automatically upgrading them with settlement size increases

then you need to word that point completely different. walls are just another side affect of the ppl complaining about too many siege battles in m2tw. you can blame them.

I make it clear with a qualifier which points are opinions, but I take your point, maybe I will move the opinions all into one separate block, but they are based on my perception of actual differences, which are facts. You may like them, or you may not, and occasionally I have stated which side I am on, but emphasise this is my personal viewpoint

it is simple, make a list of facts and make another opinions list. you can't call that list as facts atm.

Thanks for your post, my main problem with the unit replenishment is not the system but the speed: it only takes 1 or 2 turns to recover devastating losses. This may be realistic because of 1tpy but destroys the significance of casualties gameplay-wise, and is much much faster than NTW and S2TW, where retraining was replaced well but you had to minimize casualties

1 to 2 turns is 1 to 2 years in game time. the rate is perfect for me, is realistic. and for once, compliments the gameplay really well. but that is just my own opinion. you can always mod your own

when I read your list, it felt like someone trying to pull a fast one on me.

ps: half truth still isn't the truth.

[GussieFinkNottle]

A lot of those who love Rome 2 (and just to make clear, I like it a lot, just not nearly as much as Rome 1) never played the original Rome. Is there anyone here who didn't play RTW, or has altered their opinion of R2 having seen or remembered what they are missing? Just curious, no agenda.