Re: Which Rome Total War is more historically accurate Rome 1 or Rome 2?
Welcome to TWC, Cassadgaxia! 
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
@Alwyn you wrote:
Questions:
How many AI controled armies besieged your city?
As I said, it was an enemy city, not my city. The attackers were one AI army (my ally) and one army under my control.
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
How many of them had their OWN siege equipment such ladders, siege towers and rams?
The AI army had, and used, its own ladders and seige towers. You previously wrote:
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
Rome II AND Attila siege AI can not assault walls AT ALL!!!!
However, as I said, I've seen the AI using siege equipment - ladders and siege towers - to assault walls, despite your claim that they can't do this "AT ALL". I usually see this when there are two armies attacking the city (as in this case, an AI army of an ally, supported by the player's army) or when the city doesn't have an army in addition to its garrison (when the enemy approaches, our walled cities are likely to have armies defending them).
I understand why you might think they that don't. I don't defend walled cities very often - this is quite rare (especially if you're used to Shogun II, where defending castles is common). It's rare in Rome II because, usually, when a walled city is defended by an army, the AI starves out the defenders. This is a sensible strategy, because a siege assault are usually costly for the attacker. The army outside the city are likely to have a better chance by forcing the defenders to make a desperate attack. It would be fun if the AI attacked walled cities more often, but it would make the game easier - and players tend to say that they prefer Total War games to be harder.
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
Or...if there was a 2nd or a 3rd army under AI control waited the 1st one to place its own siege equipment on the walls to allow them to attack?
The second army was mine. I waited for the AI army to put their ladders and siege towers against the walls before I send my warriors in, just as the AI does when the second army is AI controlled.
I see where you're 'coming from' - Rome II only allows one army to build siege equipment, a second army must either use the siege equipment placed by the first army or use its arillery (if it has artillery) to make a breach. You're saying that you believe that the second army should have its own siege equipment - and it's true that the second army won't have it.
However, if my army had siege equipment, I would have ordered them to drop it and to use the ladders and siege towers left by the AI army instead, to minimise casualties from arrow towers. In other words, the AI is acting sensibly.
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
Last question. Have you saw any horsemen to dismount inorder to use the siege equipment like they do in Shogun II?
No, I haven't. If your point is that Shogun II handles cavalry better in a siege assault, I agree. My preferred option for cavalry in a siege battle would be that they'd retreat after the infantry were defeated, not dismount and make a doomed attack which will (usually) get any cavalry general killed for no good reason.
Originally Posted by
AnthoniusII
Be honest please..Remember I do have ROME II and test in in VH/VH dificulties.
Why do I make those questions? Its simple. If almost 15 years ago a development team could create a basic AI that could hundle 2-4 AI controled armies assauloting to the same city the player defends with EACH army had its own ladders, towers, tunnels and rams , then what prevented the so call super duper NEW ROME II develpment team to create something close to it and save us from idiotic solutions of non walled settlements to walls that melt under rain and wind?
That last question was the reason why CA/SEGA silently banned me from its official forum inorder to avoid answer that SIMPLE QUESTION.
You ask me to be honest; I am - and I can reasonably expect the same from you. I thought that, perhaps, when you said that the AI "can not assault walls AT ALL!!!!", this was based on early reviews of the release version of the game or on very limited experience of playing it. If you play Rome II, then it's reasonable to expect you not to mislead players.
I don't agree that non walled settlements are "idiotic". I enjoy the variety of battles which Rome II offers - field battles, ambushes, battles in non-walled settlements, port battles and siege battles. Different types of battles suit different styles of warfare. For example, which faction's army would you want to use in the following scenarios?
(a) You're attacking a Macedonian army of pikemen, peltasts and shock cavalry on an open plain under a bright sun
(b) You're defending against a Roman army of heavy swordsmen in a foggy forest in Germania
(c) You're ambushed by an Arverni army of swordsmen and slingers in a valley
(d) You're defending a non-walled settlement against an Armenian army of hill-men, axemen and elite archers
| My preferences |
(a) A Roman army would be well-suited to attacking the Macedonian army on the plain. Your Triarii are sufficiently heavy spearmen to defend against the shock cavalry. Your heavy swordsmen are more agile than the pikemen and can attack them in the flank. Your cavalry would lose to the shock cavalry but they're capable of handling the peltasts.
(b) A Suebi army would be ideal for a defensive battle in a Germanic forest. Your Scout Riders will tell you where the enemy are and your stealthy infantry will be able to hide from their scouts, except at close range (and, when your Scout Riders have met them, the enemy may not have scouts anymore).
(c) Have you ever ambushed a horse archer army in Rome II? Trying to catch horse archers between two lines in an ambush is like trying to catch water from a waterfall by clapping your hands together - the horse archers will simply flow quickly out of the killing zone and soon they'll be running down the slingers and shooting the swordsmen in the back, so a faction such as Royal Scythia or Parthia would be good at handling being ambushed.
(d) Defending a non-walled settlement is easier for factions which have a combination of heavy defensive melee infantry (pikes or spears) with good ranged units, so a faction such as Cimmeria (hoplites and heavy archers) or Bactria (pikemen and elite archers) would be great for this. As Cimmeria or Bactria, your Citizen Cavalry would perform poorly against enemy heavy cavalry or heavy infantry, but with their medium weight (medium means they're heavy enough to knock down light infantry but not actually 'heavy', which would mean they'd be slow) and decent armour, Citizen Cavalry would be good at attacking elite archers.
|
The point of the question is that, in Rome II, the variety of battles is useful because different faction rosters and armies are better in different situations. Some factions have all-round rosters, but some have limited rosters which creates additional challenges. Of course, we can use mercenaries to fill the gaps in a limited roster, but that's not the only solution. One of my favourite features of Rome II is the client states and satrapies mechanic. This is available to some factions but not others - Celtic and Germanic factions can liberate nations (creating allies and trading partners), Greek, Carthaginian and Roman nations can create client states and eastern nations can create satrapies.
Client states and satrapies allow players to recruit units from another faction's roster, by sending an army into their regions to recruit them (they're levy units, not mercenaries - and you only have a limited selection and can only recruit a small number per turn). This allows factions to have a precious few of units they wouldn't usually have.
For example, as Pergamon I had great defensive infantry and short-range skirmishers, but my roster was limited. I made Royal Scythia into a client state and spent about a dozen turns building up an army which had a mixture of Pergamon units with Scythian horse archers and lancers. This was very successful for a while, as I fought my way south from Anatolia in a war against Egypt. In that campagn, too, I fought alongside an AI faction and that faction used siege ladders to assault walls. I really valued by Scythian units, because I could only recruit them slowly and only in Scythian territory - so it was a devastating blow when two of Egypt's armies attacked this army of mine and killed or captured every warrior.
Last edited by Alwyn; April 13, 2019 at 03:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
Play WOTG with the Super Slaughter sub mod - now that is a challenge!
