the game is so :wub: i went back to Medieval 2

[Hoplite of Ilis]

Well well...

Nice to see you got a new job here

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Nice to see you got a new job here

Thanks. Just doing my part buddy

[Duncan III]

Unfortunately the hoplite is correct, it's a very sucky game.

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Unfortunately the hoplite is correct, it's a very sucky game.

Have you tried any mods ?

[lt1956]

For myself I have not played RTW2 since I bought it a while back. I still feel I wasted my money like a sucker. Its has some nice features I wish were in the original RTW but Many other changes and Dumbing down features that I feel ruin the game for me, also the mechanics of the Engine I don't like with regard to AI. The games are getting more simplistic and removing features with each new title. Plus the fact of forcing the USE of STEAM has never been a good thing for me, since I believe a person should not have to connect online to play their game, But that is another issue best not touched. lol

I guess its all about choice, I FIND very little new games that even interest me anymore compared to the older games I keep going back to, even though they have dated graphics, the gameplay in my opinion is better. But that is just my Opinion.

[Welsh Dragon]

It is interesting the way we're all Total War fans, many of us with easily a decade or more of experience with the series, yet we can have such very different views on which games are the best and what we like.

As I've said before, Rome 2 is probably my favourite Total War and one of my all time favourite games. Meanwhile Medieval 2, while I remember it as being a good game for the time, just doesn't have the same lasting appeal to me that it does to some. To me Med 2: Kingdoms has always been one of the weakest expansions, while Rome 2's DLC campaigns include some of my all time favourites from any Total War such as Empire Divided. And I just haven't had the inclination to go back to those earlier games in many years, and I don't really see that changing.

I think just goes to show that there isn't just one type of Total War player. Just like any group, while we may share something in common, we're all still individuals.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Daruwind]

The game itself changed a lot as well. There were a lot hype and dreams and then hard crash during release then period of chaotic patching then after long period of time patch 16 overhauled the game a lot then the long time period when there was nothing.. And now recently the new DLCs/patchs/updates. I understand @lt1956 opinion. He has no obligation to play game anymore after all the history but on other hand we as fans playing till now we are also not objective but we have at least current experience. Plus development of mods like DeI,they went a long long road almost Via Apia and current complex very overhauled state is way different from what the game or early mods offered in the past. Judging R2 without current experience and comparison with just patch 1-16 window..it is like reviewing ToB but with only Attila experience...it is possible, not perfect.

[Welsh Dragon]

The game itself changed a lot as well. There were a lot hype and dreams and then hard crash during release then period of chaotic patching then after long period of time patch 16 overhauled the game a lot then the long time period when there was nothing.. And now recently the new DLCs/patchs/updates. I understand @lt1956 opinion. He has no obligation to play game anymore after all the history but on other hand we as fans playing till now we are also not objective but we have at least current experience. Plus development of mods like DeI,they went a long long road almost Via Apia and current complex very overhauled state is way different from what the game or early mods offered in the past. Judging R2 without current experience and comparison with just patch 1-16 window..it is like reviewing ToB but with only Attila experience...it is possible, not perfect.

That is a good point. I tend to judge a game by how it is now, rather than how it was months or years ago, but if CA hadn't been putting in all the work after launch I wouldn't have played it anywhere near as much.

(Also think you mean Patch 17, as that's the one where they overhauled all the faction traits, and the last of the original run of support. 16 was a fairly unremarkable patch as I recall... I could be wrong though.)

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Daruwind]

Well you are right Welsch! Looks like it was actually patch 15 https://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Patch_Notes_(TWR2).html

(at least for me, I´m mostly referring to building overhaul when all effects got really changed in Emperor edition)

I also try to judge the game upon current state just as scientist I try to be aware of trend/history. So yeah, CA has done some work to repair reputation. And at the same time I understand those who stopped played long time ago but their opinion is hardly 100% valid for current state at least from my point of view. :/

[Welsh Dragon]

Well you are right Welsch! Looks like it was actually patch 15 https://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Patch_Notes_(TWR2).html

(at least for me, I´m mostly referring to building overhaul when all effects got really changed in Emperor edition)

I also try to judge the game upon current state just as scientist I try to be aware of trend/history. So yeah, CA has done some work to repair reputation. And at the same time I understand those who stopped played long time ago but their opinion is hardly 100% valid for current state at least from my point of view. :/

Ah, so I was right and wrong!

Yeah, the Emperor Edition update (Patch 15) was a real gamechanger. Still quite amazes me they did such a big overhaul not once, but several times (Power & Politics and Ancestral Update were on a similar scale) without directly charging money for them. I know DLC gets a bad wrap from some, but the way CA does it, making the updates to mechanics and features not cost you a penny, while offering new content such as factions and campaigns as paid DLC is still in my view one of the best models around.

And you do have a point. I can understand why those that only played earlier versions of Rome 2 would see it in a less positive light. I just wish some would give it another go with fresh eyes, instead of still treating it like a pariah. I mean if you already own the game, what have you got to lose by giving it another go?

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Has anyone noticed that what CA promised about the politics system in 2013 has now been completed with the ancestral update patch?

I was playing DEI where I have this huge family of Carthage, and one of my diplomats was a lady sent to court the Medians. She betrayed me, so the leader, who was so outraged and is 63, is weary of the whole political situation. He had to take over from Medionnium who at first was a great leader before going mad. The new leader, 63, had her insulted in the whole of the court, and reduced her influence to such an extent that she weeps in shame. Everyone now mocks her. She's the margethe of the court.

An noble had betrayed the Leader, so the leader had him killed. In the meanwhile he's been taking a lot of breaks. Running Carthage is very difficult for him.

[Metallistic]

Rome II with DEI > any other TW with any other mod (except when I want to play fantasy, then Warhammer II and M2:TW + Third Age take the cake). Go ahead and get mad, but it is the truth.

[alhoon]

The game was so I went back playing Medieval 2 Total war.

Even with mods Rome 2 is game, anyone else think the same?

Nope.
I tried to return to M2TW but I simply can't.

[Noble Savage]

I tried also but I can't get fall in love with the graphics all over again .

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Nope.
I tried to return to M2TW but I simply can't.

I tried also but I can't get fall in love with the graphics all over again .

Ιt's difficult after all these years, even when using EB2.

Rome II with DEI > any other TW with any other mod (except when I want to play fantasy, then Warhammer II and M2:TW + Third Age take the cake). Go ahead and get mad, but it is the truth.

I see you're a man of culture as well...

[Nebaki]

They should rename Rome 2 into Hellenic/Hoplites Total War. I give it a try ones again since i found out i can´t delete Games via my Steam Libary. Still Hoplites & Pikes and many useless DLC that should be for Free or you play Rome as Faction.

[alhoon]

Well, the Romans have their armies, the barbarians have their armies, the nomads have their armies. Aside of that, what did you expect?

[Mayer]

Medieval 2 was an elegant game for a more civilized age. The players of today are fine with mediocrity, if they get baited by some shining graphics.
These are the people that anti-consumerist companies like CA rely on to make their profit, the sheer arrogance, to tell the playerbase not to buy their game if they don't like it, is telling.

Also let's not dare talk about mods, Med2 had the most moddable engine in existence wheras CA keeps shoveling mod-breaking patches into Rome2 to sell their crappy DLCs.

[Alwyn]

Medieval 2 was an elegant game for a more civilized age. The players of today are fine with mediocrity, if they get baited by some shining graphics.

While I agree that Medieval II is a great game, there seems to be a popular misconception that all Rome II offers is shinier graphics. For example, the combination of new features after Medieval II - such as guerrilla deployment and a true line of sight system - transform the experience of playing (or fighting against) stealthy factions such as the Suebi. The ability to play factions with weaker starting positions and different strengths, including hybrid factions which combine the fighting styles of different cultures, adds to the game's replayability for me. I like the increasing differences between factions with newer patches (such as the different technology trees for different cultures) and the ability to liberate nations or to create client states or satrapies. I enjoy Rome II a lot.

These are the people that anti-consumerist companies like CA rely on to make their profit, the sheer arrogance, to tell the playerbase not to buy their game if they don't like it, is telling.

I see them very differently. The comment about telling people not to buy their game if they don't like it sounds like a reference to the controversy over the addition of women leaders and generals. The CA representative told the obvious truth (if we don't like a feature of one of their games, we can change it with a mod or not play) - unlike some who made misleading claims that a 50% rate of female leaders and commanders is normal for Rome II factions generally (some even claimed that Rome has 50% female faction leaders and commanders, even though the actual percentage is zero!). What amazes me about this situation is that many people got angry at a representative of the games company who told us the truth - instead of the people who lied to us.

Also let's not dare talk about mods, Med2 had the most moddable engine in existence wheras CA keeps shoveling mod-breaking patches into Rome2 to sell their crappy DLCs.

We can talk about mods if you like. Yes, the abiility to create new worlds with Medieval II is brilliant. Yes, it's annoying when people's mods don't work because of patches. Even so, there are impressive mods for Rome II - and I've seen significant improvements in the base game with recent patches. People complained that agents were overpowered (I agree, the first time an army was mass poisoned by a high-level enemy agents, I felt like me army had been the target of an air strike). Agents were nerfed. People complained that transport ships were more powerful than warships. Now, warships (at least for factions whose ships have rams) reliably sink transports. People complained that we had no family tree, the old politics system didn't make sense and that civil wars were arbitrary. Now, we have a family tree, we can see the reasons why a rival party is loyal or not (by hovering over their loyalty score), different political strategies are available (such as not appointing rivals to command roles, or appointing them and promoting them alongside supporters of the ruling faction) and we can see which regions are controlled by which party. In my previous Carthage campaign, defeating African kingdoms was fairly easy, now it's harder since AI African kingdoms can use the larger roster from the Desert Kingdoms DLC. Battles are more challenging, I'm seeing better flanking from the AI and more aggressive moves (such as cavalry charging into my skirmishers and general, then withdrawing to charge again just like a player would). It felt strange playing as the Iceni, Boudicca's tribe, being unable to have women as leaders or generals - now factions which historically had woman as leaders and generals can have them. These improvements may not be significant to you, but they're significant for me.

As for patches 'to sell DLCs', this doesn't make sense. We get the patch for free whether we buy the DLC or not. I enjoyed DLCs such as Empire Divided, Desert Kingdoms and Rise of the Republic.

[Welsh Dragon]

Medieval 2 is a good or even great game, I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. But so is Rome 2. So which you prefer largely comes down to personal preference more than anything else.

This whole idea that some seem to want to push, that if you like the newer stuff you're "fine with mediocrity" because you've been "baited by some shining graphics," is not only inaccurate, but to be honest it also makes my blood boil. I've been a Total War fan as long, or in some cases longer, than the people who praise Medieval 2 as the best (or Rome 1, or Shogun 2 or Empire etc) yet somehow I'm supposed to be less (intelligent? discerning? what?) just because I prefer a game a little more recent?

The reason I come back to Rome 2 time and again is not the graphics (I couldn't care less about graphics and generally play on fairly low settings anyway, especially on my old computer) but the gameplay. I enjoy many of the changes it brought to the series, such as the region/province system; limited building slots; armies tied to generals; army caps tied to Imperium; Imperium itself; stances etc. They address many of the issues I had with earlier Total Wars, such as every region being an island unto itself; difficulty in managing large empires; being able to build everything everywhere; swarms of small armies; feeling little attachment to armies and units etc. It's the game that, for me, hits the spot.

As for mods, again it's personal preference. Medieval 2 may have the most moddable Total War engine, but as I have little interest in mods for me that's a very minor factor. I respect, it's frustrating when a new patch comes out and some mods need updating or cease working. But I'll happily take more patches and updates over a game that stays the same for fear of breaking mods. This is especially true when there's the option to choose from up to 5 different patches through the betas tab, so if the new patch breaks your favourite mod you can just roll back to an earlier one that doesn't until said mod is updated, or if it isn't so you can continue to play how your were before. There's no reason we can't all enjoy these games just by picking our own patch/mod/no-mod combination we prefer.

Speaking of patches, they aren't made to sell the DLC. It's the DLCs which are made (in part) to pay for the patches. That's how they can have over a years worth of initial support, and return to a game several years old with new content and major updates. If you'd told me back when I was playing Medieval 2 that I'd have the option some day to pay a few pounds and get to play as someone like Wales or one of the other minor powers in the main campaign, and in doing so I'd also support further patching, including replacing many of the grey rebels that existed when the game first launched with fleshed out factions I could fight against even without paying, or pay to play as them, I'd have jumped at the chance.

One of my favourite features of Medieval 1: Viking Invasion, alongside the great Viking campaign, was the addition of Sicily, Aragorn and a third faction (whose name escapes me right this second) to the Medieval 1 Grand Campaign. So to me that was a feature sorely missing from Rome 1, Medieval 2, Empire and Napoleon, and one I'm happy they brought back for Shogun 2 onwards.

In conclusion, we all have our favourites and our games that just didn't quite hit the spot. We can all enjoy them, whichever they may be, without feeling the need to tear down others because they like a different game than us.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.