Partially off-topic: EB2 enthusiasts' opinions on Alea Jacta Est

[Septentrionalis]

Alea Jacta Est, another serious strategy game set in classical antiquity, is on sale at Steam. I apologize for posting a thread about another game, but I simply cannot conceive of a more relevant place to ask for people's opinion on the game. This is where all the dedicated history-loving, realism-oriented gamers of the era/genre hang out.

Before I spend my money and acquire a parallel addiction with further consequences to my social life, I would like to know how you feel about the game if you have tried it.

[Lusitanio]

By watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bky6_cjhdVU
It seems a lot like Crusader Kings type of game. Seems good if you like Rome history and to play as them

[Jurand of Cracow]

I've tried it and it was fun. I play it from time to time. This is much more an "old strategy" type of a game: moving your armies, counting the war resources, reacting to the enemy coming out of the fog of war. There's no much building - just campaigning (and it's why I prefer EBII).
On historicity - what I value a lot - I've got some problems with the map (but I'm quite pedantic in this respect). However, the personalities and forces seem to be very historical (or I simply don't have enough knowledge).
On mechanisms - they seem to be good but I haven't played it enough to have a firm opinion. Mind that it's not an extremely complicated game, actually, this is the simplest of this family (other are about Thirty Years War and other).
Anyway, don't buy it - this can have severe consequences for your social life once you get hooked.
JoC

[HolyBob]

Really hard to get into. Play the Epirus campaign and it was fun for a while, but I don't understand how to play effectively

[Septentrionalis]

By watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bky6_cjhdVU

Thank you. Haven't finished the video yet, but the guy seems to have the kind of analytical approach that I am specifically looking for.

There's no much building - just campaigning (and it's why I prefer EBII). On historicity - what I value a lot - I've got some problems with the map (but I'm quite pedantic in this respect).

A fellow pedant reporting for duty. The regions are small and thus numerous, which is to my liking. But on a quick glance they do seem a bit off. In addition, there are spelling issues (such as Appolonia for Apollonia and odd -ae genetive forms in place of -a) that I find disconcerting. The former is common for English speakers due to a lack of phonemic length opposition in the language, but to me it suggests unfamiliarity with classical languages.

Mind that it's not an extremely complicated game, actually, this is the simplest of this family (other are about Thirty Years War and other).
Anyway, don't buy it - this can have severe consequences for your social life once you get hooked.

It is good to get a confirmation that the game is not too complicated. It sure looks complicated and a game that one can spend a lot of time on playing just a single turn. I have a tendency to play EB2 meticulously and the prospect of starting a game that takes a lot of time is a bit menacing. Your final suggestion is something I take seriously. There are so many books to read and games to play that getting hooked on this one for a long period of time might not be in my best interest.

[paleologos]

Alea Jacta Est is a grand strategy game.
Not really comparable to an M2TW mod.
The reason I was easy to sell on the TW series is that I had loved very much Lords of the Realm II. (Yes, yes I know...)
As a matter of fact, I find that the resource management in the TB part of LotRII was more interesting than the technology tree buildings in the TB part of TW games.

Other than that, the real time tactics in TW are much much better and that's the thing I would miss in a grand strategy game.

[Seimour]

As a general rule, games made by Ageod still run on a very old and very poorly optimized engine. As others have pointed out, its hard to get into. I personally dislike the way they tend to make their UI so inaccessible and unpleasant to use unless you've played a lot of their games. It can be fun for a short while but once you realize the AI is utterly inept, it's hard to lose. If you've played other of their games before, you'll also notice they tend to remake the same games over and over in a different setting but without much improvements to basic mechanics so that a game they made years ago is basically the same thing as one they made recently without major visible improvements.

[Septentrionalis]

Thank you paleologos and Seimour for your input as well. It is good to know that grass is not all that greener on the other side. I'll stick to EB2 and if I need a diversion, I'll explore what the modding community has done for other TW titles.

[Wolf Priest]

If you really want something like TW from the same developer a AIE, try Fields of Glory 2. Other than that, wait for Paradox to release Imperator: Rome.

[Seimour]

If you really want something like TW from the same developer a AIE, try Fields of Glory 2. Other than that, wait for Paradox to release Imperator: Rome.

Field of Glory II doesn't have a proper campaign map unlike Pike and Shot: Campaign does but it is a very fun game and the units are animated and rather nice looking. I'd heartily recommend at least for the custom battles made by members of the community which are often very well put together. As a matter of fact, Pike and Shot, Field of Glory II and Sengoku Jidai are all good games if you like the periods they are set in but they are pure wargames in the sense that there is no nation management even in the campaign mode, its purely battles. However, they have no game breaking bugs or crashes unlike Ageod games which sometimes never get patched despite not being playable( Thirty years war) .Their main downside(to me but the wargaming community is so conservative and toxic I'd be hard pressed to find people who agree with me) is the play by email multiplayer(PBEM) from the 90s which is not for everyone.

[Jurand of Cracow]

... game breaking bugs or crashes unlike Ageod games which sometimes never get patched despite not being playable( Thirty years war)

Thanks for this info, Seimour. I was considering buying this game, I've hesitated, and now you've confirmed my qualms. On my side I may just hint that the Aleia Iacta Est seems to be largely forgotten by this developer - what's a shame given how fun it can be if continued to be improved (esp. AI...)

[Seimour]

The pricing on their games is usually quite high so if you buy one and realize it never got a patch and that a lot of it a recycled AI, UI and mechanics from basically 10 years ago it can be very disappointing. I own many Ageod games but I don't recommend the studio generally speaking. They've had a new engine supposedly in the works for a long time that they haven't released yet which is supposed to deal with the performance issues (seriously their games from 2008 crawl down to a halt on high end PCs its insane)and modernize the UI and a bunch of other good things but they are still releasing stuff on their old one. When Paradox bought them I thought they'd finally get the funding to spend time on improving their games but they then proceeded to secede from them and went back to doing exactly the same thing under the matrix umbrella. I feel safe criticizing them here but if you go on a steam discussion page about one of their games or their forum, you'll get nuked by their fans if you don't fall down on your knees to praise their work. People who have been buying their games since 2005 apparently don't seem to mind that they haven't really tried to refine their formula beyond minor details. It boggles my mind. There's a lot of good ideas in Ageod but it doesn't always pan out the way it ought to be.

Might want to give Field of Glory II a try because Ageod is making a game off this here:
http://www.ageod.com/news/2744/Field...s.Beta.is.open