is roma surrectum coming to rome II total war?

[TallestDavid]

be gnarly if roma surrectum comes to rome II total war

[romanius24]

I dont think so, team has retired and R2 engine is kinda.....

[Bercor]

No.

[Dramatic Cat]

I doubt the dev team would bother making a mod for a crappy unfinished game like RII.

[Alavaria]

It's been confirmed by dvk that this is not a thing that will be happening.

[dvk901]

There is much that is 'nice' about Rome2....I'll admit that much. I like the graphics (up until Patch10beta screwed with things), and I'd give my eye teeth for the buildings. Naval battles would be nice as well....but they are 'candy' as far as I'm concerned in an era like this where land battles were the most important ones of all. Yes, I know that sea battles were of some importance....but in general, sea battles were the exception....and Rome2 seems to have no idea that non-naval cultures really shouldn't be constructing huge transports and warships that they never could have done.

But the real problem is that Rome2 nerfed a lot of features that RS2 tried very hard to focus on. The Roman political system in RS2 needs characters....Rome2 has no family tree, and magic characters that appear out of nowhere. Characters can also have only three traits (last I heard), which totally dispenses with the Roman Leadership, the Greek, Armenian, Parthian, etc leadership schemes we implemented. And the buildings are so nerfed in Rome2....well, you get the point. About all you could do would be put the units in....but RS2 isn't just a bunch of Legions and units.

So no, Iwill not be involved in an 'RS2' for Rome2. Instead, I am going to work on making RS2 better and better.

[Alavaria]

but in general, sea battles were the exception....and Rome2 seems to have no idea that non-naval cultures really shouldn't be constructing huge transports and warships that they never could have done.

Weren't assaults against fortified positions also an exception... whereas it seems the world is taken over via settlement assaults in RTW

[dvk901]

Weren't assaults against fortified positions also an exception... whereas it seems the world is taken over via settlement assaults in RTW

I don't know about...or how...1-turn campaigns go, but I know for a fact that a good 75% or more battles are in the field in 0-turn. Taking\sieging a settlement can only be accomplished after you've slogged your way through some serious opposition before you can even attack a settlement. Plus, I've had cases where I sieged a settlement, and then fought several field battles with armies that came to defend it. I do think that in 1-turn campaigns you are less likely to fight as many field battles....thus, the complaint that RTW is a siege fest. But 0-turn is far from just sieging cities all the time...which is why I love it! (ok, 1-turners, step in an hammer me for saying that. )

[ur-Lord Tedric]

..................thus, the complaint that RTW is a siege fest. But 0-turn is far from just sieging cities all the time...which is why I love it! (ok, 1-turners, step in an hammer me for saying that. )

Funnily enough - whilst I haven't borrowed my son's Mjolnir - I've never come across the complaint that "RTW is a siege fest"; nor indeed have experienced it all the testing I did as Rome, which was all 1turn. Firstly I'll note that in less than 1% of my battles do I ever get be-sieged myself.

The only sieges I really do are mostly siege assaults by me and otherwise I settle down and be-siege, often thereafter I still get an open field battle as more enemy troops come to try and relieve them. Adopting the classic Roman strategy I spend most of my time using Legion Field Armies to relieve the trip-wire Forts; and there are also certain passes (most notably ones approaching Dyrrachium!) where I can have battle after battle.

Nope - most 1turn battles are open field for me - it's just that there are less overall - let alone that 0turn recruitment is wholly unrealistic (as I've argued many times before).

[dvk901]

Funnily enough - whilst I haven't borrowed my son's Mjolnir - I've never come across the complaint that "RTW is a siege fest"; nor indeed have experienced it all the testing I did as Rome, which was all 1turn. Firstly I'll note that in less than 1% of my battles do I ever get be-sieged myself.

The only sieges I really do are mostly siege assaults by me and otherwise I settle down and be-siege, often thereafter I still get an open field battle as more enemy troops come to try and relieve them. Adopting the classic Roman strategy I spend most of my time using Legion Field Armies to relieve the trip-wire Forts; and there are also certain passes (most notably ones approaching Dyrrachium!) where I can have battle after battle.

Nope - most 1turn battles are open field for me - it's just that there are less overall - let alone that 0turn recruitment is wholly unrealistic (as I've argued many times before).

You just had to throw that in there, didn't you? But seriously, all geriatrics aside, this is good to know. I have seen the 'siege-fest' comment quite a few times, but not necessarily in the RS2 forum. I think a LOT depends on how you play the campaign. As Alavaria noted above, he plays 0-turn but avoids the field battles wherever possible. I tend to play long drawn out campaigns with lots of forts and armies blocking passes, and I expand very slowly and methodically. It allows the AI to grow a lot, and because I am so defensive, when I do go on the offensive, I am facing a lot of resistance.

But, as I've said, I enjoy the battles and don't mind fighting lots of them. I am rarely sieged myself as well, unless I take a city that the owning faction really gets upset about my taking it.

[sadlogic]

let alone that 0turn recruitment is wholly unrealistic (as I've argued many times before).

I have read/heard somewhere that a legion was recruit every year for a campaign and disbanded afterwards. So with 2 turns to build a stack (almost) seems far more realistic than 1-turn (assuming the popular "stack = legion" handle)
Please correct me.

[neep]

I do think that in 1-turn campaigns you are less likely to fight as many field battles....thus, the complaint that RTW is a siege fest. But 0-turn is far from just sieging cities all the time...which is why I love it! (ok, 1-turners, step in an hammer me for saying that. )

I play 1-turn only (seems unrealistic to be able to generate 9 full stacks per 6 months)
I certainly don't feel that it's a siege fest, but then my base comparison would be Vanilla rather than 0-turn RSII.
I can understand the ratio of field- to siege- battles would be different between 0-turn and 1-turn and so it might feel like 1-turn is more weighted towards seiges. But there's clearly a dependence on how you play and how you take over the opposition.
With garrison scripts, last city scripts, (feels like) more aggressive barbarian attacks - I've certainly had to modify my strategy in planning how to take over cities and expand my empire.

If anything, I feel (so no statistical evidence to back this up) that there are more field battles; due to my style of play and the fact that I can't blitz through a region, taking over cities and replenishing troops as I go.

[Alavaria]

If anything, I feel (so no statistical evidence to back this up) that there are more field battles; due to my style of play and the fact that I can't blitz through a region, taking over cities and replenishing troops as I go.

If anything, because the AI can recruit from every single settlement (it has the cash to constantly build top tier barracks, especially certain factions), the way to compensate for that is to assault a ton and make HEAVY use of your tier1/tier2 units.

Having every single settlement you own cranking out one of these per turn and constantly streaming into the front will allow you to maintain a blitz that is based on human wave assaults (though really, with missile units you don't need to go to -such- extremes, since they don't die and give you much better overall kill ratios)

[swhunter]

Hi DVK, do we have any updates on the SVN? Or are you doing a full patch? I'm still here for RS2. When i have time I'm still testing that Spartan campaign! lolol

[Alavaria]

Hi DVK, do we have any updates on the SVN? Or are you doing a full patch? I'm still here for RS2. When i have time I'm still testing that Spartan campaign! lolol

Hey swhunter, good to see you

[dvk901]

Hi DVK, do we have any updates on the SVN? Or are you doing a full patch? I'm still here for RS2. When i have time I'm still testing that Spartan campaign! lolol

Nothing for SVN yet...just been testing and experimenting, and gathering ideas. Good to hear from you!

[century x]

No times infinite...

[Alavaria]

Hmm, ok. Discounting "my one unit runs from a full stack" battles, I would've guessed I had 50%+ siege assaults and maybe 25% or less of proper field battles. Actually, let's see...

190 battles, of which ~100 are assaults. another ~20 are assaults on the same settlement or a fort. So that's 120 siege assaults. Now ~20 battles were "i sally and lose", leaving another 50... perhaps 25 of those a sea battles or "1 unit runs from a stack", leaving about 25 proper field battles. so 25 out of a relevant 145 were field.

I am biased though. On my 0-turn, it seems like the most horrible way to fight the AI is to ram your stack into its 10 revenge stacks. Which seem to spawn in great amounts all over the place. Field battles are risky and can be costly, win or lose, so going around deathstack #23 is probably a better idea than going through it.

[Alavaria]

Well, you have two sets of logistics chains; new units to the front, and worn out ones to the recruitment centers. Though Roma can only train one new unit of skirmishers or whatever every 6 months somehow, it can train one unit of skirmishers and retrain another 8 units of elite infantry at 1 soldier left. (Though really, you shouldn't be relying too much on elite infantry and the like)

Also, if you have long sea logistics chains using boats to ferry everyone to the front, you can have 10+ settlements constantly adding their 1 unit/turn into the chain, resulting in you dumping a new half-stacks every single turn, until your target breaks.

[Alavaria]

Ahh, that reminds me of a great battle I had in RS1, where I had my gold army (12 units of gold upgraded and XPed up units + 8 units of militia hoplites) attack an enemy's elite stack. I also had a reinforcement stack under AI control of 1 phalanx unit (the general's unit) and 19 units of militia hoplites.

I positioned myself between the reinforcements and the AI and began maneuvering. When the time came, I advanced into their pila (with the militia) and began flanking with archers. AI counterflanked and I killed it's flankers.

About this time, 19 units of militia hoplites just rolled over the AI, at which point I was easily able to shoot the rest of the Romans in the back. Ah, joy. It broke their back afterwards, they couldn't recruit more than a half stack before being steamrolled.

I also had a similar fight in a settlement where my 12 upgraded+8 militia stack brought along another 40 units of militia to fight a stack of Romans. It was pretty great!