Rome II: Total War

Users who are viewing this thread

attachment.php
 
You guys can't see it? It still pops up for me...

rejenorst said:
Its a forum link to CA's forum. Guessing whatever was on it was deleted by mods.

CA has been cleaning house on the Total War Forums due to all the "critic" review bull**** going on, so it's possible what you said is true.
 
It will sell a ****load of copies just because of the name. The quality of the product is utterly irrelevant once you've reached a certain amount of market penetration.
But yes, I am convinced that they'll lose even more of what little of the old audience is left.
 
So...going off this thread would it be safe to say that this game isn't worth buying? I finally have a computer that can run it decently, but from what I understand the battles literally last 3 minutes or so, which is a big put off for me.

Also, I would be grateful if anyone could tell me what the best original Rome: Total War mod is. I've heard good things about both EB and RS.
 
TheFlyingFishy said:
So...going off this thread would it be safe to say that this game isn't worth buying? I finally have a computer that can run it decently, but from what I understand the battles literally last 3 minutes or so, which is a big put off for me.

Also, I would be grateful if anyone could tell me what the best original Rome: Total War mod is. I've heard good things about both EB and RS.

They don't last 3 minutes, but they're a bit faster than Shogun 2, which was already pretty damned fast. To be honest it's not the speed of the battles that's the issue, I actually prefer it over the Medieval II slugfest, it's more the seemingly-random aspect to the battles due to their new health and damage system. Since units take damage as a whole instead of dying off individually you'll have a unit kill 100-200 guys taking maybe 5 casualties, then suddenly have them all drop like flies and rout. One of the many stupid decisions regarding this game. I guess they put that in in lieu of having actual formations and a health system that makes sense to simulate the "Ancient Roman unit tactics" they went on about?
 
Wasn't the majority of the team completely new to making strategy/tactics games? I guess a ****load of all the issues can be pinned on that, including all the stuff that worked in previous games and suddenly got dropped or changed to some retarded new model.
 
If you get Roma Surrectum, make sure you download Roma Surrectum II. It's the enhanced version of RS, has a larger campaign map, more units, better economy, it's like a total overhaul of RS.
 
You have a lot more control for units with the "Disciplined" trait (most of the "civilized" Greco-Roman-Persian units have it), namely, they will fight locked in formation and you won't get much of that turntable nonsense on the frontlines where they break formation to fight 1v1. There are still some 1v1 fights going on but suffice to say the battles look a lot better for formed-up units. Elephants and chariots aren't insanely effective any more so there's another plus. Siege AI is supposedly better but I have yet to try it and I doubt it.

It sounds good on paper but in reality battles are still ridiculously stupid due to the health system. If they focused on that instead of making fixes to specific units then maybe we wouldn't be living in a world where a flanking charge from Cataphracts deals maybe 7 or 8 casualties to an "elite" unit. Oh yeah, they also took the time to add a "purchase content" button to the main menu. Hooray.
 
Yeah I had a particularly face-palm battle with a friend earlier today, I was Athens against his Sparta. Was doing alright, our phalanxes were just sort of grinding up against each other. Then he pushed on one flank with his elite Spartans, and I responded by charging those units in the flank with some lancers I had hidden behind a nearby hill. They don't do a single casualty and I end up losing the battle. I know elite units are supposed to be good, but that **** is ridiculous.
 
Amontadillo said:
EB over RS any day. RTR might be good.

I have been playing Roma Surrectum II, and am now back to EB for a bit, and I have to say that this belief of "RS is the gamey arcade children's mod living in the shadow of EB" is just something that stems from EB's vast popularity as being superior to everything else in every way.

I love EB to death, and it's a top quality mod in all respects, but so is RS II. It's right up there, if not in fact better. The amount of content is very fast, I keep seeing units upon units, but then again I also do in EB, and I've played it for a while. RS II definitely feels more polished, and more modern, and I also prefer it's building system. It's a lot more fun.

EB is arguably unparalleled when it comes to historical detail, but I haven't seen anything ahistorical in RS as of yet. It also gives great attention to historical accuracy and authenticity, second only to EB, from what I've seen.

Where RS clearly beats EB are the battles. The battles LAST. The scale of the battles is bigger, and you have room to think and maneuver. cavalry has been slowed down to realistic speeds, the javelins and generally skirmishers work better and so on.

Anyway, felt like sharing that. Definitely get both peeps, they are both too amazing to pass up on.
 
Back
Top Bottom