On May 11 2013 06:49 Chocolate wrote: I refuse to buy this game if they only release a very small amount of factions along with a bunch of DLC factions. Complete and utter bull. DLCs should be things like unit expansions, map expansions, or other important changes (like a different battle screen), not things that should come with the game on the first day and which can't even take that long to create.
At the very list, if they're going to do the DLC scam they should release the vanilla game for free.
no idea why you are angry about those three greek cities being DLC. You can play Macedonia which is another greek kingdom and I bet those three city states will just play the same. There might be some differences in the style of rulership between them but the units are the same.
You have no idea? No idea at all? I mean, they've never done anything like this with Total War and you have NO idea?!
Especially for factions so central to the game. I mean, Ikko Ikki...yeah okay don't really need them. But the Greek States o.O jeez, that's something serious to ship the game with that can't be used if you don't spend £15 ($23).
They originally planned on having only the 8 factions. This was locked in development well before they decided to add the Greek States. They're including them as DLC for free because the dev team decided to include them but as an addon so it wouldn't interfere with ship dates, deadlines, etc.
Also, they made a point that regardless of retailer, all preorders would get the preorder bonus and the dlc. Just use the cd-key that your game has to register it on Steam.
Well I'm flabbergasted they didn't think to include the Greek States from the get-go o.O. I mean come on, they are at the very centre of the action! If anything, a race like Pontus is far less significant in the general scheme of things. Greeks were one of the most enjoyable factions to play in Rome 1.
the greek city states were a piece of shit when the romans came. They were conquered by Macedon and with the death of Alexander they started infighting again. There was nothing great about the greek city states anymore when the romans appeared.
Yet from the trailer they've released for the Greek cities we can see Spartans.... Corinthian helms with transverse crests, muscled bronze cuirasses, hoplons and 8 ft spears... That's okay for 490 BC, but isn't the game meant to start in 275 BC?
I'm sure it'll be a good game but it's a shame that for some people it's the only history they'll learn!
The only historically correct game TCA ever made was Napoleon, and it wasn't exactly the most popular in the series. To be honest, I wouldn't be against a game in which you played as Gaius I. Caesar, first having to conquer and pacify gaul and afterwards the civil war with Pompeius.
On May 11 2013 06:49 Chocolate wrote: I refuse to buy this game if they only release a very small amount of factions along with a bunch of DLC factions. Complete and utter bull. DLCs should be things like unit expansions, map expansions, or other important changes (like a different battle screen), not things that should come with the game on the first day and which can't even take that long to create.
At the very list, if they're going to do the DLC scam they should release the vanilla game for free.
no idea why you are angry about those three greek cities being DLC. You can play Macedonia which is another greek kingdom and I bet those three city states will just play the same. There might be some differences in the style of rulership between them but the units are the same.
You have no idea? No idea at all? I mean, they've never done anything like this with Total War and you have NO idea?!
Especially for factions so central to the game. I mean, Ikko Ikki...yeah okay don't really need them. But the Greek States o.O jeez, that's something serious to ship the game with that can't be used if you don't spend £15 ($23).
They originally planned on having only the 8 factions. This was locked in development well before they decided to add the Greek States. They're including them as DLC for free because the dev team decided to include them but as an addon so it wouldn't interfere with ship dates, deadlines, etc.
Also, they made a point that regardless of retailer, all preorders would get the preorder bonus and the dlc. Just use the cd-key that your game has to register it on Steam.
Well I'm flabbergasted they didn't think to include the Greek States from the get-go o.O. I mean come on, they are at the very centre of the action! If anything, a race like Pontus is far less significant in the general scheme of things. Greeks were one of the most enjoyable factions to play in Rome 1.
the greek city states were a piece of shit when the romans came. They were conquered by Macedon and with the death of Alexander they started infighting again. There was nothing great about the greek city states anymore when the romans appeared.
Yet from the trailer they've released for the Greek cities we can see Spartans.... Corinthian helms with transverse crests, muscled bronze cuirasses, hoplons and 8 ft spears... That's okay for 490 BC, but isn't the game meant to start in 275 BC?
I'm sure it'll be a good game but it's a shame that for some people it's the only history they'll learn!
The only historically correct game TCA ever made was Napoleon, and it wasn't exactly the most popular in the series. To be honest, I wouldn't be against a game in which you played as Gaius I. Caesar, first having to conquer and pacify gaul and afterwards the civil war with Pompeius.
Hannibal: total war?
I don't think it would be that fun to be gaius in his barbarian crusades. Most of that was him just being a crazy badass and setting up battles way in advance for the barbarians to just run in and die to him. Hannibal fighting the might of roam killing 1/5th of its male population and ending in that crucial and heart breaking battle of carthage seems like the makings of a great Napoleon game.
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
Shogun 2 wasnt nearly as fun due to lack of unit variation.
I really hope it isnt the case for Rome 2.
but Rome 1 was amazing so im not too worried.
In Shogun the Cavalry was worthless because every army always had a shitload of ashigaru as they were the cheapest unit.
IDK im excited for Rome 2, played a shitload of Shogun 2, but i am hoping with more unit variation there will be more incentive to play all of the different races.
(like in shogun,, the clan with the bonus to Navy... why would i play the clan thats bonus affected the worst part of the game that i always simmed anyways?)
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
That said, I can't wait for some Roman Era naval battles mang. I'm so pumped and I'm such a fanboy you dont even. That tactical map is basically giving me a chub thinking of how many AAR's I can do now with that. That and sieges. We haven't had a proper siege mechanic since Medieval 2.
Yeah... but I'm not being a fanboy for that part. Shogun 2 sieges were kinda bad and navals were atrocious. Of course I hope for the best bud I wouldn't raise my hopes too high in this category.
As for the rest of your post, I agree and that was kinda what I meant in the end even though the wording was wrong. I meant more the gameplay (how units move, camera, interface etc) than the feeling.
Anyway I have played like 20H of S2 vanilla versus 200h of moded S2 where battle takes a lot more time than vanilla so I guess I won't feel that much of a difference.
Shogun 2 wasnt nearly as fun due to lack of unit variation.
I really hope it isnt the case for Rome 2.
That should be fine. Anyway lack of unit variation wasn't my main issue with S2. Sieges, Navals and overall AI are more of a deal breaker that this series seem to have big trouble improving on...
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
That said, I can't wait for some Roman Era naval battles mang. I'm so pumped and I'm such a fanboy you dont even. That tactical map is basically giving me a chub thinking of how many AAR's I can do now with that. That and sieges. We haven't had a proper siege mechanic since Medieval 2.
Yeah... but I'm not being a fanboy for that part. Shogun 2 sieges were kinda bad and navals were atrocious. Of course I hope for the best bud I wouldn't raise my hopes too high in this category.
As for the rest of your post, I agree and that was kinda what I meant in the end even though the wording was wrong. I meant more the gameplay (how units move, camera, interface etc) than the feeling.
Anyway I have played like 20H of S2 vanilla versus 200h of moded S2 where battle takes a lot more time than vanilla so I guess I won't feel that much of a difference.
Shogun 2 wasnt nearly as fun due to lack of unit variation.
I really hope it isnt the case for Rome 2.
That should be fine. Anyway lack of unit variation wasn't my main issue with S2. Sieges, Navals and overall AI are more of a deal breaker that this series seem to have big trouble improving on...
... at least modders can help a bit.
i REALLY enjoyed sieges in shogun 2. for the first time in a total war game. in rome and medieval 2, sieges were alright, though the cities were a little big, controlling units on walls was pretty badly done. in empire, however, that became way worse. occasionally, entire batallions would just die when walking down a flight of stairs. napoleon was the same. so in shogun 2, they got rid of walls. and suddenly, all the problems you had with controlling your units were solved. i loved it.
naval battles were quite boring in shogun 2, i'll agree with that. i dunno if that's gonna change, i'm really stoked for the combined land/naval battles though.
and the ai, well, never was that great. would be cool to have challenging cpu that does not win a battle because their units morale, armour and damage are far greater that yours.
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
IDK im excited for Rome 2, played a shitload of Shogun 2, but i am hoping with more unit variation there will be more incentive to play all of the different races.
(like in shogun,, the clan with the bonus to Navy... why would i play the clan thats bonus affected the worst part of the game that i always simmed anyways?)
Absolutely. Shogun 2 was a QUALITY game, it did many things very very right. The unit variety issue was not a problem of the design, it was a problem of the geographical selection. It was always going to be the issue with Shogun 2. Rome 2 WILL not have such problems.
I am very very pumped, after getting my pre order for 30 and getting over the shock of the £45 price tag on Steam haha. This is gona be the best :D. I have been with Total War since youth and they have never let me down. Even Empire which everyone slated, if you put enough time and effort into it, was extremely rewarding and enjoyable.
On May 18 2013 15:29 qotsager wrote: and the ai, well, never was that great. would be cool to have challenging cpu that does not win a battle because their units morale, armour and damage are far greater that yours.
Hah, I have always been the sort of guy who enjoys a crappy AI that you can outfox, but which will always beat you in a straight up battle. It allows you to get incredible against-the-odds victories but always gives you the threat that you will be wiped out if you don't concentrate . In fact, part of my enjoyment of the series has been working out the CPU exploits. Bizarre, I know. But if you want real competition you should never look at AI, there hasn't ever been a game in any category where the AI comes close to a human challenge.
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
That said, I can't wait for some Roman Era naval battles mang. I'm so pumped and I'm such a fanboy you dont even. That tactical map is basically giving me a chub thinking of how many AAR's I can do now with that. That and sieges. We haven't had a proper siege mechanic since Medieval 2.
Yeah... but I'm not being a fanboy for that part. Shogun 2 sieges were kinda bad and navals were atrocious. Of course I hope for the best bud I wouldn't raise my hopes too high in this category.
As for the rest of your post, I agree and that was kinda what I meant in the end even though the wording was wrong. I meant more the gameplay (how units move, camera, interface etc) than the feeling.
Anyway I have played like 20H of S2 vanilla versus 200h of moded S2 where battle takes a lot more time than vanilla so I guess I won't feel that much of a difference.
Shogun 2 wasnt nearly as fun due to lack of unit variation.
I really hope it isnt the case for Rome 2.
That should be fine. Anyway lack of unit variation wasn't my main issue with S2. Sieges, Navals and overall AI are more of a deal breaker that this series seem to have big trouble improving on...
... at least modders can help a bit.
i REALLY enjoyed sieges in shogun 2. for the first time in a total war game. in rome and medieval 2, sieges were alright, though the cities were a little big, controlling units on walls was pretty badly done. in empire, however, that became way worse. occasionally, entire batallions would just die when walking down a flight of stairs. napoleon was the same. so in shogun 2, they got rid of walls. and suddenly, all the problems you had with controlling your units were solved. i loved it.
naval battles were quite boring in shogun 2, i'll agree with that. i dunno if that's gonna change, i'm really stoked for the combined land/naval battles though.
and the ai, well, never was that great. would be cool to have challenging cpu that does not win a battle because their units morale, armour and damage are far greater that yours.
Shogun 2's sieges were based entirely around bum rushing the walls and having your units climb them and then fighting in a small field inside of the castle and that's it. Siege weapons were next to useless and it never really felt like a true siege, it felt like a glorified land battle. I hope so hard Rome II is different. I hope that if you try to assault a city or fortress on your first day you'd get your shit wrecked. I hope you have to spend days building ladders and building siege towers and other siege weapons and I hope it's a legitimate tactic to actually siege a city out and, from what I've seen from the Carthage gameplay footage my dream is coming true.
Maybe we just have different opinions but I will much prefer enormous sieges where you not only have to fight tooth and nail for the walls, but then once you get that it's not even close to over and you have to fight city street to city street. I want it to feel like a real siege of a huge city, less sending all my Ashigaru and Samurai to the walls and right clicking and that's really it.
On May 11 2013 06:49 Chocolate wrote: I refuse to buy this game if they only release a very small amount of factions along with a bunch of DLC factions. Complete and utter bull. DLCs should be things like unit expansions, map expansions, or other important changes (like a different battle screen), not things that should come with the game on the first day and which can't even take that long to create.
At the very list, if they're going to do the DLC scam they should release the vanilla game for free.
no idea why you are angry about those three greek cities being DLC. You can play Macedonia which is another greek kingdom and I bet those three city states will just play the same. There might be some differences in the style of rulership between them but the units are the same.
You have no idea? No idea at all? I mean, they've never done anything like this with Total War and you have NO idea?!
Especially for factions so central to the game. I mean, Ikko Ikki...yeah okay don't really need them. But the Greek States o.O jeez, that's something serious to ship the game with that can't be used if you don't spend £15 ($23).
They originally planned on having only the 8 factions. This was locked in development well before they decided to add the Greek States. They're including them as DLC for free because the dev team decided to include them but as an addon so it wouldn't interfere with ship dates, deadlines, etc.
Also, they made a point that regardless of retailer, all preorders would get the preorder bonus and the dlc. Just use the cd-key that your game has to register it on Steam.
Well I'm flabbergasted they didn't think to include the Greek States from the get-go o.O. I mean come on, they are at the very centre of the action! If anything, a race like Pontus is far less significant in the general scheme of things. Greeks were one of the most enjoyable factions to play in Rome 1.
the greek city states were a piece of shit when the romans came. They were conquered by Macedon and with the death of Alexander they started infighting again. There was nothing great about the greek city states anymore when the romans appeared.
Yet from the trailer they've released for the Greek cities we can see Spartans.... Corinthian helms with transverse crests, muscled bronze cuirasses, hoplons and 8 ft spears... That's okay for 490 BC, but isn't the game meant to start in 275 BC?
I'm sure it'll be a good game but it's a shame that for some people it's the only history they'll learn!
The only historically correct game TCA ever made was Napoleon, and it wasn't exactly the most popular in the series. To be honest, I wouldn't be against a game in which you played as Gaius I. Caesar, first having to conquer and pacify gaul and afterwards the civil war with Pompeius.
Hannibal: total war?
I don't think it would be that fun to be gaius in his barbarian crusades. Most of that was him just being a crazy badass and setting up battles way in advance for the barbarians to just run in and die to him. Hannibal fighting the might of roam killing 1/5th of its male population and ending in that crucial and heart breaking battle of carthage seems like the makings of a great Napoleon game.
Caesar was crazy badass alright, but also a master strategist. He fought people who outnumbered him more often than not, who were physically a lot stronger/taller than his ligionaires (Romans were barely 1,60m tall, the gauls were a lot taller). Just like Alexander the Great, he managed to beat the odds time and time again.
On May 14 2013 11:36 rezoacken wrote: I expect the game to be similar to Shogun 2 to be honest, just with some differences obviously but the "feeling" should be the same for combat and campaign.
Just with more variety etc. of course.
That said, I can't wait for some Roman Era naval battles mang. I'm so pumped and I'm such a fanboy you dont even. That tactical map is basically giving me a chub thinking of how many AAR's I can do now with that. That and sieges. We haven't had a proper siege mechanic since Medieval 2.
Yeah... but I'm not being a fanboy for that part. Shogun 2 sieges were kinda bad and navals were atrocious. Of course I hope for the best bud I wouldn't raise my hopes too high in this category.
As for the rest of your post, I agree and that was kinda what I meant in the end even though the wording was wrong. I meant more the gameplay (how units move, camera, interface etc) than the feeling.
Anyway I have played like 20H of S2 vanilla versus 200h of moded S2 where battle takes a lot more time than vanilla so I guess I won't feel that much of a difference.
Shogun 2 wasnt nearly as fun due to lack of unit variation.
I really hope it isnt the case for Rome 2.
That should be fine. Anyway lack of unit variation wasn't my main issue with S2. Sieges, Navals and overall AI are more of a deal breaker that this series seem to have big trouble improving on...
... at least modders can help a bit.
i REALLY enjoyed sieges in shogun 2. for the first time in a total war game. in rome and medieval 2, sieges were alright, though the cities were a little big, controlling units on walls was pretty badly done. in empire, however, that became way worse. occasionally, entire batallions would just die when walking down a flight of stairs. napoleon was the same. so in shogun 2, they got rid of walls. and suddenly, all the problems you had with controlling your units were solved. i loved it.
naval battles were quite boring in shogun 2, i'll agree with that. i dunno if that's gonna change, i'm really stoked for the combined land/naval battles though.
and the ai, well, never was that great. would be cool to have challenging cpu that does not win a battle because their units morale, armour and damage are far greater that yours.
Shogun 2's sieges were based entirely around bum rushing the walls and having your units climb them and then fighting in a small field inside of the castle and that's it. Siege weapons were next to useless and it never really felt like a true siege, it felt like a glorified land battle. I hope so hard Rome II is different. I hope that if you try to assault a city or fortress on your first day you'd get your shit wrecked. I hope you have to spend days building ladders and building siege towers and other siege weapons and I hope it's a legitimate tactic to actually siege a city out and, from what I've seen from the Carthage gameplay footage my dream is coming true.
Maybe we just have different opinions but I will much prefer enormous sieges where you not only have to fight tooth and nail for the walls, but then once you get that it's not even close to over and you have to fight city street to city street. I want it to feel like a real siege of a huge city, less sending all my Ashigaru and Samurai to the walls and right clicking and that's really it.
don't get me wrong, the kind of siege you're hoping for is exactly what i want, too - i was just saying that i enjoyed capturing castles or fortresses in shogun 2, and preferred the mechanic over the ones empire and napoleon had. you can argue though that those were hardly "sieges". of course rome 2 needs to be different, because of the setting if nothing else. the trailer does look very promising in that regard. if the game is anywhere near as good as rome: total war was, and if they manage to make the multiplayer campaign playable from the release or at least shortly thereafter, then this is sure to become one of my favourite games.
I'm curious if Rome 2 is going to try to "sell" any of the unplayable from the start factions in the campaign as DLC later on. As much as I like CA I don't completely trust Sega. I guess mods will fix that though, like with all the others.
On May 19 2013 07:10 DonKey_ wrote: I'm curious if Rome 2 is going to try to "sell" any of the unplayable from the start factions in the campaign as DLC later on. As much as I like CA I don't completely trust Sega. I guess mods will fix that though, like with all the others.
Of course they will. Sega is EA behind a thin veil.
I hope we get something like this though. Apparently each individual unit in a line has a health bar, and this would be an interesting addition as a formation.
On May 19 2013 07:10 DonKey_ wrote: I'm curious if Rome 2 is going to try to "sell" any of the unplayable from the start factions in the campaign as DLC later on. As much as I like CA I don't completely trust Sega. I guess mods will fix that though, like with all the others.
Of course they will. Sega is EA behind a thin veil.
I hope we get something like this though. Apparently each individual unit in a line has a health bar, and this would be an interesting addition as a formation.
>.< That video really discourages me from wanting to play any of the barbarian groups now lol. Poor Iceni.
I could just Romanize a mansion and have a big-screen playing HBO's Rome 24/7 while I played RTW:2 at release on a brand new computer. Would be pretty awesome.
I just read about this, and I'm already super excited! I just installed Rome 1 on my PC again, and honestly, that game is still like 2 times better than at least half the games that are released right now lol. The controls, for me at least, still feel really fluid and smooth, especially the cav feels so good.
Also I assume you can't just unlock all factions by changing the descr_strat file anymore in RTW2
On May 19 2013 21:56 Fildun wrote: I just read about this, and I'm already super excited! I just installed Rome 1 on my PC again, and honestly, that game is still like 2 times better than at least half the games that are released right now lol. The controls, for me at least, still feel really fluid and smooth, especially the cav feels so good.
Also I assume you can't just unlock all factions by changing the descr_strat file anymore in RTW2
IKR, I remember first playing the tutorial when it came out. It was like holy shit, this game is legit. That feeling has never gone away. Same feeling I got from OoT and Deus Ex. Just a fucking legit game which is max quality. Then Sega came in and the feel of the game changed, I thought initially for the worse, but to be honest it's just a different thing. They have set everything up nicely with Shogun 2 which, aside from the fact that it was based in a relatively boring region (lacking variety), had a LOT of qualities and a lot of tidiness. With hero abilities having just the right amount of power and a return to assassin videos etc.
Now they just need to put what they learned making Shogun 2 and combine it with the amazing legit feeling that Rome 1 gave you. I cannot wait to have my tired, beleaguered troops standing impatiently outside a city's walls, waiting for the desert to take its toll on their supplies, to feel the sun on their backs with them and the dust kick up in their faces...before bloodthirstily welcoming the surrounded forces as they sally out of their keep for one last hurrah. Their cavalry vaingloriously charging to cut through my general's bodyguard, peppered by disheartening crossbow volley and unhorsed by cruel spear; my cavalry ruthlessly scything down stragglers as the troops get on with the bloody business of the day. Finally the enemy, mercilessly wrought and cleft in twain by hammer and sword, is entirely vanquished, and my victorious but ever more wearied troops parade through the streets to lay claim to the city's capital and feel the refreshing waters of its baths on their sunned faces.
What makes me laugh most about Rome is how the voices get deeper and more manly the better the unit is. Hastati and like auxiliary bowmen or rodian slingers have hilarious lame, high voices, where urban cohort sounds like the butcher from Diablo 1.
All I hope is that we get Generals who give terrible speeches again.
I am known as something of a philosopher. Some ask me, 'Why are we here?' The answer is often complicated... but today we are here to kill all those bastards.
Er, where was I? Oh yes. Attack the elephants, men! Go for those pink trunky beggars! There was... something else…
But beware! Beware! The enemy will be merciless, because I ate all their bees! They have not tasted honey for many a moon, and this has made them mad for revenge! To arms, my pretties, to arms!
EPT
. In fact, part of my enjoyment of the series has been working out the CPU exploits. Bizarre, I know. But if you want real competition you should never look at AI, there hasn't ever been a game in any category where the AI comes close to a human challenge.![[image loading]](http://1.media.dorkly.cvcdn.com/64/89/f94e0fccfeae6a4d18edc85d418e12d1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uGtUOiD.jpg)
