Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: I don't get it.

  1. #1

    Default I don't get it.

    I stopped playing Rome 2 after a month of it's launch and never touched it again. I found the game horrible. Decided to try again now with DEI and it's basically the same?

    Sure, units are more historical and there are a few more mechanics in place. But, my armies still require generals, garrisons are still randomly generated for me, units have no weight or collission. Units still try to find their training partner to do their animations, battles lines don't exist, Battles are decided by stats not tactics, sieges are terribly slow and take ages to finish specially fighting on the walls is the worst thing ever, etc...

    Like, I don't get it. Everyone talks so much about this mod but it doesn't address the main problems that are wrong with this game and all modern total war games. I'm guessing everyone just plays this for the spectacle which is quite good but I just don't get the rest...

  2. #2
    Senator
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Germany ,NRW
    Posts
    1,237

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Well it's a mod for people that already like Rome 2 not a mod that makes it more like the older games.I haven't found any mod that fixes the issues I have with Rome 2 either.
    Last edited by Sint; July 30, 2022 at 02:50 PM.
    Elder Scrolls Online :Messing up the Lore since 2007...

    Well overhand or underhand: 3:50 Onwards...

  3. #3
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    11,050

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Garrisons are not randomly generated, you still see what units are provided by what buildings. And especially in DeI battles are decided by tactics and not stats, especially if you want to have smaller losses and not get your self into trouble with population. If anything, it was Rome 1 where tactics were not as important vs unit stats, which played bigger role. Battles lines dont look any different compared to Rome 1 either. Animations are also good example since most of DeI animations are not 1v1. You can even turn off 1v1 fully but then you will not have kill animations.

    In sieges you brought a good point, you expect them to be fast and flashy but mostly these were long sieges without actuall assaults so unless you have huge advantage, you should wait it out. If you do want to assault, then use TACTICS and dont just try to push yourself through single point or it will be a slugfest.

    I think you just look at Rome 1 with rose tinted glasses like I did but trying to play it last years shocked my how much arcadish Rome 1 was will unit speed being ridiculously high and very short melee.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  4. #4

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Massive . Everything you said is completely wrong and nothing that I actually saw.

    Actually see the the real proof:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxecs-jhpOA

  5. #5
    Jake Armitage's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    apartment 6
    Posts
    4,665

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    you'll never be capable of finding the sensations you felt with r1 and m2tw again
    we were younger, we were hungrier

    I don't play old TW engine games since 2014.
    Tried a m2tw tatw dac run 2 years ago and I shut everything down after an hour, it bored me immediately, basically

    generals: that's a classic, I was shocked too the first time I played rome2 (with dei, never played vanilla). after first playthrough it just became normal, also 'cause it basically doesn't change anything.
    And the cap to army quantity is a gameplay must

    in new engine games, the campaign part is just overall better in any regard (also is 10x times more moddable than old engine)
    custom maps and some un-fixable features (code bugs) regarding the battle manager are the big issues of rome 2 (and attila, which is better for some parts, worse for others)

    contemporary games like wh3/troy/3k have grown really much, and with good mods they almost are flawless (almost), or at least they aren't heavily noticeable

  6. #6

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake Armitage View Post
    you'll never be capable of finding the sensations you felt with r1 and m2tw again
    we were younger, we were hungrier

    I don't play old TW engine games since 2014.
    Tried a m2tw tatw dac run 2 years ago and I shut everything down after an hour, it bored me immediately, basically

    generals: that's a classic, I was shocked too the first time I played rome2 (with dei, never played vanilla). after first playthrough it just became normal, also 'cause it basically doesn't change anything.
    And the cap to army quantity is a gameplay must

    in new engine games, the campaign part is just overall better in any regard (also is 10x times more moddable than old engine)
    custom maps and some un-fixable features (code bugs) regarding the battle manager are the big issues of rome 2 (and attila, which is better for some parts, worse for others)

    contemporary games like wh3/troy/3k have grown really much, and with good mods they almost are flawless (almost), or at least they aren't heavily noticeable
    Sorry but one giant no. Unlike you, I never stopped playing Rome 1 or Med2. I'm doing a campaign on Rome 1 with Extended Cultures mod. The general change is a real problem. I could place small band of units to act as distractions or to harass large armies before they got close to my main army. Now I can't do any of that.

    Same problem with generated garrisons. In older titles I can change what city to fortify and which one to ignore. Now I can't. Not to mention the dumb army limit. Older games did it better yet again, your army limit was your economy, instead of some artificial number nonsense.

    Contemporary TW games won't get a single coin from me. I already wasted money on Rome 2 and Attila and hate them both. I fail to see how they have grown, all I see is the dumbing down the series.

    Sorry for the double post, I can't edit or delete them.

  7. #7
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    7,643

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    The battle ai of Rome I is abysmal bad, nearly no reaction to flanking. Even on very hard difficulty level the battles are easy to win.

    Flanking with cavalry, the AI always don't see the danger. Autowin.

    You have more than 4 siege towers and rams? High chance, siege battle stuck in a loop, enemy troops don't move. Kill them with archers or javelinmen.

    The sieging army is 10 times bigger? No problem, let them break the gates and run into a spear or phalanx unit behind the gate. Attack them with your general cav in their back. Easy win, as Rome I AI don't protect its back.

    Its incredible easy and unchallenging to win a Rome I campaign.

    I trust more the word of an experienced modder like Jake or Kam than some ranting random youtube guy without any game mechanic knowledge.
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; July 19, 2022 at 06:50 AM. Reason: grammar, grammar, grammar

  8. #8
    AnthoniusII's Avatar Μέγαc Δομέστικοc
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Thessalonike Greece
    Posts
    18,734

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post
    The battle ai of Rome I is abysmal bad, nearly no reaction to flanking. Even on very hard difficulty level the battles are easy to win.

    Flanking with cavalry, the AI always don't see the danger. Autowin.

    You have more than 4 siege towers and rams? High chance, siege battle stuck in a loop, enemy troops don't move. Kill them with archers or javelinmen.

    The sieging army is 10 times bigger? No problem, let them break the gates and run into a spear or phalanx unit behind the gate. Attack them with your general cav in their back. Easy win, as Rome I AI don't protect its back.

    Its incredible easy and unchallenging to win a Rome I campaign.

    I trust more the word of an experienced modder like Jake or Kam than some ranting random youtube guy without any game mechanic knowledge.
    I wont disagree with these observations but what i miss most from Rome I that never apeared again in any TW game is the abillity of AI controled armies to attack separatly building their own siege equipment like ladders, tunnels (another great miss) ,sige towers and rams. In M2TW only the primary army builds such equipment and the rest armies just watch waiting a breach to strom in... Unlass they have onagers etc.
    Having attacks from all does of the horizon gave a sence of realism no matter how nad AI was. In Rome II but mostly in Attila I was furius when CA/SEGA did not improved AI on sieges. Instead they thought that if the walls would melt (they should be made frm sugar) AI could storm the cities!
    In this matter Rome I REMAINS BETTER from Rome II AND ATTILA.

  9. #9
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    7,643

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Yeah they could be fun, but after the walls had been fallen, the fun was over, as enemy units headed without any cohesion (stucked at the buildings, the streets, long line of single soldiers walked to the city center)

    I forget the most annoying "feature" a not working diplomacy where you could buy the rich Korinth for 500 Gold, or make a peace agreement only to the next turn the AI declares war at you again.

    Some of my most exciting siege battles i had in Rome II, where deploying my troops (which where from what quality) before the attack was essential.
    Last edited by Morticia Iunia Bruti; July 19, 2022 at 07:40 AM.

  10. #10
    Jake Armitage's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    apartment 6
    Posts
    4,665

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    I don't know, I think it's a matter of tastes
    I like brunettes much more than blondes, ie

    I understand that small armies things. yeah, and you're right about that.
    But you have to understand that new games engine codes are much much more complicated.
    You may consider rome 2 and attila as first trials for building a more complex AI behaviour.
    It's quite clear that CA failed with rome2 and attila.
    But you're talking with a guy who has never found any real difference while doing battles in any TW game
    They really always seemed the same to me, from m2tw vanilla till modded wh2...
    let's say that i'm a campaign guy.

    returning on tastes... I've modded extensively both old engine (m2tw only) and new engine games.
    While I abandoned old engine games because the apex of moddability was reached quite soon (not talking about lua injector and other engine overhauls)... I now know that I could keep modding new engine games for virtually decades, before start saturating the modding potentialities
    Last edited by Jake Armitage; July 19, 2022 at 08:11 AM.

  11. #11
    AnthoniusII's Avatar Μέγαc Δομέστικοc
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Thessalonike Greece
    Posts
    18,734

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake Armitage View Post
    I don't know, I think it's a matter of tastes
    I like brunettes much more than blondes, ie

    I understand that small armies things. yeah, and you're right about that.
    But you have to understand that new games engine codes are much much more complicated.
    You may consider rome 2 and attila as first trials for building a more complex AI behaviour.
    It's quite clear that CA failed with rome2 and attila.
    But you're talking with a guy who has never found any real difference while doing battles in any TW game
    They really always seemed the same to me, from m2tw vanilla till modded wh2...
    let's say that i'm a campaign guy.

    returning on tastes... I've modded extensively both old engine (m2tw only) and new engine games.
    While I abandoned old engine games because the apex of moddability was reached quite soon (not talking about lua injector and other engine overhauls)... I now know that I could keep modding new engine games for virtually decades, before start saturating the modding potentialities
    On the contrary i never play autoresolve battles (unless i have 20 units and enemy only 1).
    I play always in RST camera not TW one to be able to watch battles from the ground...
    That is why unit detalis are essensial :

    But without descent AI behaviur those go wasted...
    I will agree its a matter of taste.

  12. #12
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Deep within the dark german forest
    Posts
    7,643

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    I play most battle by myself, except it are remnants of armies or extremely week cities except i have a bad day and want blood for the bloodqueen. ^^ But the campaign part is important for me too.

  13. #13
    Jake Armitage's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    apartment 6
    Posts
    4,665

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    yeah, I wasn't talking about autoresolve, just normal played battle
    (DeI is punishing about autoresolve btw, you usually autoresolve stupid battles only, too many casualities or simply lost otherwise)
    I swear, they all really seemed the same to me, since day 1
    And I really have played a lot
    Last edited by Jake Armitage; July 19, 2022 at 09:28 AM.

  14. #14
    AnthoniusII's Avatar Μέγαc Δομέστικοc
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Thessalonike Greece
    Posts
    18,734

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post
    I play most battle by myself, except it are remnants of armies or extremely week cities except i have a bad day and want blood for the bloodqueen. ^^ But the campaign part is important for me too.
    The campaign map and all it includes (campaign scripts, events, Campaign AI etc )is half the game. When the mod Stainless Steel 6.1 was released CBUR released a submod (the Komnenean Historical unit roster) named Basileia ton Romaeon (were ae =gr:αι) and the evenets it added thanks to Ceasar Clivus (4th crusade etc) made the game interesting. It has no point to have exelent unit models that stand steel because the game is not smart enough to create complicated chalenges. The campaign map also provides an unusuall tool. Testing TGC i nottced something that bothered me for years and i heard it in this song as the major question: How did this happen , how could this happen how did the Empire fell.

    You will find it silly but the campaign map opened my eyes... I had some answers but watching the campaign map of the mod close to its endline confirmed my answers. For those that make Historical mods the campaign map and all that includes are half of the mod ...You can not have a good mod without them.

  15. #15

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morticia Iunia Bruti View Post
    The battle ai of Rome I is abysmal bad, nearly no reaction to flanking. Even on very hard difficulty level the battles are easy to win.

    Flanking with cavalry, the AI always don't see the danger. Autowin.

    You have more than 4 siege towers and rams? High chance, siege battle stuck in a loop, enemy troops don't move. Kill them with archers or javelinmen.

    The sieging army is 10 times bigger? No problem, let them break the gates and run into a spear or phalanx unit behind the gate. Attack them with your general cav in their back. Easy win, as Rome I AI don't protect its back.

    Its incredible easy and unchallenging to win a Rome I campaign.

    I trust more the word of an experienced modder like Jake or Kam than some ranting random youtube guy without any game mechanic knowledge.
    Rome 2 does all of these things and more so I don't get what you're getting at here.

  16. #16

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Im just gonna say that if anyone thinks Rome 2 AI is even close to good than you lose all credit.
    It's so bad, they charge with Cav into phalanx, pike or spear formations when they are in town (even if there are multiple exits/entries) . If it's siege they almost always deploy on the same side, and they never ever use number superiority to flank, just rush into one or max 2 streets and make a killing funnel. AI never tries to use terrain to their advantage, it's all the same for it. There are much more examples, you can tell me about other things but never say RTW 2 AI is even near to good!

  17. #17
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Patrician Artifex

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,622

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Gents, everybody here expects discussions to be productive and friendly. Therefore, any further personal insults, or other off topic material, will be swiftly acted upon by global moderation.
    The AI Workshop Creator
    Europa Barbaroum II AI/Game Mechanics Developer
    The Northern Crusades Lead Developer
    Classical Age Total War Retired Lead Developer
    Rome: Total Realism Animation Developer
    RTW Workshop Assistance MTW2 AI Tutorial & Assistance
    Broken Crescent Submod (M2TW)/IB VGR Submod (BI)/Animation (RTW/BI/ALX)/TATW PCP Submod (M2TW)/TATW DaC Submod (M2TW)/DeI Submod (TWR2)/SS6.4 Northern European UI Mod (M2TW)

  18. #18

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Rome I does not have multiplayer campaign which to play against real person. That Rome II has. And with DeI on you can have supply lines, historical armies, realistic battle mechanics and much more. Rome I is one of my favorite total war games. But I just can't return to play it, even after remastered. It is just too old for me: clunky, horrible AI, arcade superfast battles, cartoonlike factions, no naval battles, terrible autoresolve, overpowered horsearchers... the list goes on and on for me. But I think in my opinion DeI forum is a wrong place lay blame on which one is the worse game since this forum is for discussion about the mod itself

  19. #19
    Irishmafia2020's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Navajo Nation, Arizona USA
    Posts
    1,195

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Rome 1 was easily my top all time most played game (esp. with EB mod) and Rome 2 lacks some of the freedom of that game. Still, I can't play Rome 1 anymore. It's gameplay is antiquated and simplistic. Rome 2 may be missing some beloved features, but it adds multiple other layers to the game. DEI adds further features - and this game is far enhanced over the best versions of Rome 1. I say that as a guy who played Rome 1 to death and expected to never replace that game in my heart. Honestly - I can't play without 100 plus factions now for example. Also - graphics matter in PC games. Rome 2 is impressive at it's maximum settings, and I can't rely on glitches to easily win battles. I can project force with a navy. The extra features of Rome 2 more than make up for the loss of some aspects of the first game - especially after the DEI treatment. RTW1 - my favorite all time game - is virtually unplayable to me today.

  20. #20

    Default Re: I don't get it.

    Complicated topics people.

    Huge thing - DEI adds population system. I also didn't want to play Rome 2 because of the.....just replenishment, you have your army smashed and all you need to do is put them in settlement or friendly territory to replenish. Didn't liked that at all. This is fixed with DEI, the units won't replenish if there is lack in population of certain citizen class. The army cap is....hm....if you just play your campaign and don't think about it, you will not notice it. There are the auto generated garrisons (on the older games you have to manually do this), so that's little bit a minus, but overall....if you just play your campaign is going fine and not super noticable. I give the older games plus for the campaign though, overall. Just having to manage the garrisons yourself in every settlement, having to send diplomats to open the diplomatic screen with some faction are important things for the....the whole feel of the gameplay.

    Europa Barbarorum is amazing for the older games. But....minor and yet annoying things mostly for the UI of the base games (Rome 1, Medieval 2, not mod fault):

    - No camera rotation on the campaign map.
    - To run a unit default key 'H' (come on mate...that could be changed though, so minor).
    - No battle camera mouse scroll rotation.
    - No collision feel in Medieval 2 (the audio is good though). But when 2 units clash, the entities scatter beyond their formation very quickly.
    - 'Small' battle maps (compared to the campaign map and how well it is made). They are actually normal and OK, Rome 2 with large battlefield mod is on another level however. Attila is with bigger maps by default as well.
    - No naval battles.
    - Not a lot of army stance options.

    Blurry graphic effect in Medieval 2 is making the battles with disturbingly unclear image from afar, zoomed in is OK but....well this maybe can be fixed with Reshade, again not great (with or without mods).

    Rome 2 Grand Campaign is not OK by default, is best you play with Divide et Impera there. Is good as it gets with DEI. Last i tried without mods was....2015 maybe, i had Boii tribe conquering 1/3 of the whole campaign map.

    The DLCs for Rome 2 and Attila are mission and story driven though, they are OK without mods. The Last Roman is great for Attila. Hannibal at the Gates, Caesar in Gaul for Rome 2 - classic and most fitting for the time period of the game.
    ULTRA/EXTREME/HYPER powerful agents in the vanilla Rome 2 and Attila though. Be careful. They succeed in 60% of the time regardless of the level of the agent, the AI spam them and is hard to get rid of them once they catch one of your amries as target. Sabotage attempts if not every turn, then every 2 turns. Veterans, assassins, diplomats, what have you.

    Attila is very atmospheric, is dark, chaotic looking. Fits the whole theme they want to represent with the game. Rome 2 is brigther, more relaxing and overall would appeal to more people.

    Rome Remastered is great. It has the controls fixed and the textures are higher resolution, the image is at least clear here. Campaign is fine, what i don't like are again the 'small' battle maps that it generates and loads. They are actually OK, but again not great for Ultra+ unit scale. Other than that is good and combines the good campaign of the older games with new UI and better controls. For many perhaps will be the 'future' if they make Europa Barbarorum for it for example. Or when other mods appear/develop.



    The first Youtube video - this guy is mainly Shogun 2 player if you check the videos (tournaments and stuff). That is why he is with high expectations - Shogun 2 is just much better made base game. The voice acting, artwork, map, units, sieges, is just on another level and light years ahead in dedication and how they done it (or so i feel). Great campaign, super battle maps and controls.
    Last edited by JuliusDecimus; July 22, 2022 at 02:54 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •