Hannibal at the Gates seems to be good, eh?

[Heathen Storm]

In the Lusitani description it says a + public order bonus for sacrifice...
Anybody seen anything something concerning sacrifice? Haven't gotten that far yet.

[rafmc1989]

Off-topic. Check with related mod for compatibility.

~LestaT

[Yerevan]

No its just like GC only on a smaller map. I would have liked to see historical script events, And some Generals for MP like CIG did.

Yes but historical script are clearly not part of the TW game concept anymore. It's all about alternative history/uchronia now. Hence the weak and quickly dying AI major factions.

[Scythion]

As Syracuse I turned the Samnites against Rome, I conquered Sicily and the Samnites conquered Italy. But that was a goddamn hard work to turn the Samnites againts Rome.
I think its a shame that you can't play as the Samnites or the Etruscans, I think there is something different and exotic about them unlike Rome.

[Green_Jacket]

Would love to know your opinions or see your reviews on the new Hannibal at the Gates DLC.

At the very least try an keep it constructive.

First my view concerning Hannibal at the Gates
(note I have not covered units added to Carthage as all players will gain them in patches and in effect is Free-LC)

The campaign map and starting positions are relatively similar to the grand campaign albeit Sicily and islands just to the west of Italy are now under roman control. It's actually remarkably similar to the core campaign. The only real difference is the smaller scale (thus certain faction as the greeks do not get involved or in the way). You have a few additional smaller factions.

I personally love the scale and the layout of the provinces, however it kind of feels this how this portion of the map should have been represented in the core game.

The new playable factions give me mixed feelings. In the DLC campaign they are great and you now have two Iberian factions in the main campaign.

However playing as them in the main campaign is a different matter. Syracuse feels like a generic greek faction in the main campaign and really struggles having a lack of a province capital in Sicily. This however is possibly the highlight of how the core campaign map really should be improved and not a reflection of the DLC in itself. Also I personally found the Iberian factions unit roster a tad lacking and especially not competitive with other factions later on in their military tech tree's.
The addition of new units is welcome, but they only really affect the factions unlocked and the mercenary units already had comparable units, simply you have more regions now to recruit mercenary swordsmen or heavy cavalry.

Talking about tech tree's they are now similar to the Caesar in Gaul DLC in the manner of the effects. For example playing as Carthage one tree was pretty much dedicated to diplomatic relations which makes a nice change. However paying for certain advances was removed, however this lacks context in this DLC and it's fine to rely on the normal method of gaining technology. Also it was nice to see how the technology tree's where again made to contain tech's of similar use's, aka military tech in one tree and diplomacy tech in another, in Caesar in Gaul it was a slight gripe of mine this was not the case.

Finally the campaign unlike the Caesar in Gaul DLC has a wider variety of opponents which is nice. However on the downside all those opponents will be faced anyway if you play the main campaign on the western side of the map. The only real difference is playing as Carthage or Rome you are guaranteed to fight the other while they are strong, a rarity in the main campaign. The desert factions also don't feel as overpowered and are much easier to deal with.

In conclusion

Overall I feel this is a better DLC than Caesar in Gaul, it may have done less different to the main campaign but it's a better experience and the variety in opponents help it last longer. It also gets going a lot faster. Also unlike the Caeser in Gaul DLC it adds two totally new factions (or rather makes them playable) instead of re-skinning old ones. The new units also are welcomed albeit the mercenaries are nothing truly unique in looks or ability like you saw in the Beats of war.

However it feels too similar to the main campaign in many respects. In respects to regions, provinces, overall scale and diplomacy tech, it really feels this DLC is how the core game should have been originally and in a way left a sour taste in my mouth for that very reason.

The problem Caesar in Gaul and Hannibal at the Gates is both cover periods in the core game, with similar units and factions. They do add to the core game but arguably all the experiences in them should have been in the core game, seeing only a minority of units, factions or other features are not re-skins of others already present.

Is it worth £9.99? It's questionable but I am persuaded to say yes, defiantly in comparison with the previous Campaign DLC. It does offer some new unique factions and is much more fun, but yet again CA have failed to present a truly new experience. Buy if you want to play Rome II: Total war the way it's suppose to be played

[Border Patrol]

Pretty much this. HatG map is what should have been in the core game. It's pretty great from what little I could play so far.

[DeliCiousTZM]

Im loving HATG, i think iti s a great MPC expansion. wish however that you weren't locked into so many alliances and blah blah but rather started with cancelable non agression pacts.

[Toho]

been playing an MP match with a friend on HATG and I agree, it is very fun.
however I wish Rome had its Illyrian and greek mainland coastlines to deal with.
Carthage's campaign is way more fun than rome when considering these it is always exposed at the back but rome can just charge forward, they should be something to bother them too or else its too easy.
its the only problem with the campaign.

[griffi31]

Honestly, I was really excited for this DLC pack but I feel they really dropped the ball again. There are no new custom settlements, which really should have included Nova Carthago and Syracuse at the bare minimum, Sicily is still too small at only 3 regions, and the AI still sucks. Rome just turtles in Italy the whole time, they might as well not even be at war with Carthage. How CA can continue to churn these packs out as completed DLC baffles me. This is definitely the best gameplay experience that Rome 2 has produced yet but that isn't saying much.

[Kraut and Tea]

I think it`s really great.

[baptistus]

HatG map is what should have been in the core game.

this is excatly what I feel when I play HatG.
So I can not wait to have modding tools for campaign map and to work with a team on it.

[Scythion]

I like the political and ethnic differences on the Italian peninsula, it shows that the Roman state was still just a confederation of tribes and citystates and not a unified empire.
I think that would be awsome if the Samnites and the Etruscans would be playable too.

[Border Patrol]

I feel like that's going to be the second HatG mod available on the workshop, right after the "Hannibal with his beard" mod.

EDIT: Hi Jack!

[AnonMilwaukean]

HatG is really pretty good.

Iberian factions, a scenario that actually feels like a 2-sided war (CiG was good but was sort of a free-for-all), and so forth.

My only complaint is that Rome is actually fairly boring as a side in HatG... you get only the most basic units as Rome, and no gladiators, and Triarii take some time to be able to build. Sure, you can get auxiliaries, but it's not nearly as easy as in the Grand Campaign because you usually have to fight harder for every single settlement since the HatG map is smaller.

The rest of the HatG campaign, though, is quite good. Iberia is fun to fight in now that it's more than just a couple settlements, Italy is a more daunting area to attack into, and they went out of their way to allow Carthage to follow a historical course of action. All-in-all, a lot of fun.

[Darios]

As Syracuse I turned the Samnites against Rome, I conquered Sicily and the Samnites conquered Italy. But that was a goddamn hard work to turn the Samnites againts Rome.

How did you manage to get the Samnites to turn against Rome? I have a Syracuse campaign going as well and I offered the Samnites as much as 40k coin in order to drop that Roman alliance nonsense and join me. Still refused, so I killed them...

[stevehoos]

I think it's great too, the game doesn't work half the time but that's ok, more DLC please!

[CheesyFreak]

In the Lusitani description it says a + public order bonus for sacrifice...
Anybody seen anything something concerning sacrifice? Haven't gotten that far yet.

I havent got the expansion yet, but maybe with sacrifice it means you get more public order by killing war prisoners after a battle?

[The Noble Duke Of York]

So far so good. I've been playing as Rome and the Gallic challenge comes pretty quickly which gets you right into the action. I have one minor complaint as Rome. They've made the decision to give you a legion at the start that is almost 50% merc and I hate using them as they are expensive. But I've been forced to use them for now as both the Ligurians and the Insubres have moved pretty fast against me.I'd rather have had nothing but Roman units to start with.

[Scythion]

How did you manage to get the Samnites to turn against Rome? I have a Syracuse campaign going as well and I offered the Samnites as much as 40k coin in order to drop that Roman alliance nonsense and join me. Still refused, so I killed them...

They accept military and defensive alliance if you offer them around 10k gold for each. Just make them love you better with gifts. If your standing is around 90-100, then decline every pact with Rome. They will angry at Rome, which means that you can bribe them to free themselves. After these, declare war on Rome and enjoy the sight of rampaging samnite armies on the peninsula.

[alQamar]

I would have wished seasons would have caused anything more but introducing a cool animation. In wonder how enjoyable a campaign stays with not inflicting effects weather has (not only winter)