|
So I played a couple hours as Rome on Hard difficulty.
So far its awfully easy. I think the game needs serious balancing between units and replenishment times. It isn't okay that with a 4Hastati +2 velites I'm able to destroy 3 Settlements without making a single pause, on hard. My hastati just rape garnison its ridiculous and armies are fully reinforced in 2 turns... so yeah. Arguably these are small settlements, I'll see how Carthage goes.
-There is a lot of stuff I don't like about the UI (constant tooltip while overing provinces, tooltip being useless for a lot of stuff while the real information is presented on the left instead of on the tooltip, big squares taking a lot of space) and agent stats feels pretty confusing so far (I really have no idea what choosing authority or zeal for a spy really do -.-).
-Limited army number and recruiting on the general is great but I don't think you should be able to do it after having moved.
-And (wall) sieges seems to still suck with unresponsive units, I want to pull my hair out when trying to move units on walls (or go up/down). There haven't been much improvement since Rome1 and Medieval2 in that area sadly.
Apart from that, I still enjoy it but I'll probably make a campaign or 2 and then wait for a patch/mod to fix some of this.
|
There's an argument to be said regarding the replenishment rates. It's possible CA thinks that by doing that, it offsets the downside having so few standing armies.
|
On September 04 2013 10:25 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 10:04 Sub40APM wrote:
settings on highest graphics, the game looks kind of ugly and there is choppiness on the leader phases but not on the map itself or during fighting. Shogun ran fine so hopefully some optimization patch will come out. Ai still does the suicidal attack thingy. The game feels a lot slower/takes much longer to build up which I suppose is good. All in all I think I should have waited another year/for a sale before getting it but o well. Of the 3 strategy games I bought this summer so far Rome II seems like the purchase Iam least happy with. Rome 2 automatically changes your settings to compensate if you run out of video memory. To find out if this is happening go to c:\users\you username\appdata\roaming\the creative assembly\rome 2\logs and open one of the logs(i can't remember which). It will tell you clearly if your graphics have been downgraded. If they have, you can use the unlimited video memory options in the graphics settings to force the chosen settings, then you can go about finding the right balance for your system. Its a pain that they would do it this way, but the graphics should look awesome.
i am not running out of memory, it just looks meh-ish. o well, hopefully the europa barbarum guys will get on this in another 2-3 months and then it should be a sweet game.
|
decided to stay away from buying this day one and just watch some streams.
what ive observed so far mainly is the battle speed. shit seems to finish so quickly, though as ive only watched and not played myself i cant say whether this is because the streamers are just running around with epic OP armies compared to the weak little factions or if the game on a whole is just a 3 minute rout fest.
either or i wont be purchasing for a few months at least, wait for the ugly memory leaks/ctd and other issues as such are patched out.
|
Yeah basically the one thing of note I come out with the first day is the battle speed. Not sure if it's bad or good, or how it scales, but it's certainly a change from what I expected.
|
Game is solid; only complaint is that Roman infantry basically cluster fuck and destroy everything that isn't cavalry/elephants. Pretty much same old story from RTW1.
|
On September 04 2013 13:34 superstartran wrote:
Game is solid; only complaint is that Roman infantry basically cluster fuck and destroy everything that isn't cavalry/elephants. Pretty much same old story from RTW1.
Well that is what they did after all......
My only complaint is that on hard, my provinces are constantly pissed off, and no matter what I try to build they are always rebelling. I am not short food, and I have no idea how to reduce my slave population outside of buildings, and they are always pissed lol
|
On September 04 2013 13:42 Darpa wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 13:34 superstartran wrote:
Game is solid; only complaint is that Roman infantry basically cluster fuck and destroy everything that isn't cavalry/elephants. Pretty much same old story from RTW1. Well that is what they did after all...... My only complaint is that on hard, my provinces are constantly pissed off, and no matter what I try to build they are always rebelling. I am not short food, and I have no idea how to reduce my slave population outside of buildings, and they are always pissed lol
Public order seemed much more easily and simply controlled in previous games. I'd bet we just don't know how it calculates that all out quite yet.
|
After having played this for 8 hours straight here's what I have to say (keep in mind I was playing Arverni -on hard- and from what I've been told/experienced, barb states are more difficult and play differently from other factions):
-Ai is definitely better than other TW's, is it perfect? Nope. Still does things that a human wouldn't do but it is definitely superior to what's been seen so far.
-U.I. IS confusing at first but it took about an hour to figure out what things did (Didn't do the prologue either). I didn't like it at first but now I've fallen in love with it. This also applies to unit cards and province information... It really isn't complicated if you just read for 20 seconds.
-On that note: Didn't think the province system would work out but that whole shebang adds a lot of depth to the game in terms of how you can build regions and in turn makes building require more planning than just building farmsfarmsfarms. Love it.
-Game is more difficult. Playing as Averni I got overconfident and backstabbed my ally (who had other allies) to get the final region I needed for a province. Long story short I found myself at war from literally every side and the battles were already tough to begin with... so that campaign was a failure... Can't remember the last time I lost a campaign in a TW game. Also love it.
-Graphics... need I say anything. Although I just want to point out that I have yet to experience any bugs whatsoever, maybe I just got lucky, but I really dont think the bugs that are being reported are as common as people make it out to be.
-Love how there are tons of units and to a lesser degree how each faction has their own kind of agents(Averni champions are warmaidens whereas Iceni? have warlords). It's a refreshing change from seeing yari ashigaru poke eachother for hundreds of hours.
-Harder to snowball with the limited army thing.
Complaints / Other things
-No family trees...  However It does kind of make sense since you're pretty much playing as a political party rather than a family. Still...*bitter tears*
-I love/hate the tech tree. Each faction has their own set of civil/military techs which have 3 different branches each, however, the tree itself seems small. Haven't reached the end of either one so I don't know if it IS small or it just looks that way.
-Battles don't really finish quickly playing as a barb fighting other barb states. The "really" means they end instantly if they get flanked from behind with cav... that's kind of expected though... no?
|
On September 04 2013 14:44 BAHRAM wrote:
-Battles don't really finish quickly playing as a barb fighting other barb states. The "really" means they end instantly if they get flanked from behind with cav... that's kind of expected though... no?
You should expect any units below hero status to rout instantaneously if cav hits them from the back, lol.
|
I feel like cav units are weaker than in Rome 1. Granted, I'm not rolling around with cataphracts and companions with Rome, but infantry seem to be much more robust. I'm more interested in trying Sparta now, which has basically no good cavalry.
|
On September 04 2013 15:03 xDaunt wrote:
I feel like cav units are weaker than in Rome 1. Granted, I'm not rolling around with cataphracts and companions with Rome, but infantry seem to be much more robust. I'm more interested in trying Sparta now, which has basically no good cavalry.
My starting companion cavalry for Macedon hit gold veterancy off of 3 battles with barbarians, those poor poor celtic skirmishers.
I spent a good thirty minutes laughing at all the bugs on the TW reddit, haven't experienced any myself, pretty funny stuff.
|
I played it a couple of hours and i am far away from totally understanding the ui and how some of the systems work (especially the slave/food/popularity thing). But there are some things i dont like (or correct me if i just havent figured it out).
- The difficulties on the different cultures are a bit to wide spread for my taste (this far i just played Sparta and Rome). I understand that this is a point of the game that is done on purpose but i think its maybe too much.
- The AI looks a bit over aggressive against each other one the global map. Maybe it was just a random fluke but in my Sparta game Athene attacked the 2 cities in the north within the first 3 rounds, leaving me without an attack target on land besides themselves which is bad because Athene looks way stronger in the early stages with their heavily guarded capital.
- The AI just plain sucks at conquering cities. I had a battle with 1/4 of the army and the AI just attacked at one narrow street and nowhere else. I was looking all the time to find Leonidas because it looked exacly the same  . And the city didn´t even had walls or a harbor.
- The tech tree looks kinda... weird. But thats maybe just me not understanding it 100%.
|
The only problem that I have had so far is when I use an agent the success rate seems really random, I failed two 95% success missions in a row and then succeed with a 40% mission, didn't make much sense to me.
|
have only tried Egypt and of course Rome so far, absolutely love it.
Have not yet encountered any bugs /glitches.
The romans seem really, really strong yes.
Wrecked the Etruscans with a whopping 4 hastati and 2 velites on normal so rerolled and tried on hard to see the difference, still very strong.
Tried a couple of turn 1 rolls with Sparta, Athens and Iceni to see if they could do the same, all failed quite hard without recruiting anything else.
But I guess the Romans should be stronger.
I have not yet figured out how to manage public order well, every town you occupy goes into -35 order and even with edicts and multiple temples or other buildings improving it, it seems harder to manage.
Any of you guys have a good grasp on what " authority" and " dignitas " actually do for generals ?
I have read the tool tips etc but can't really figure out what it does or changes in game.
Also, I like the other houses options in factions but once they start assassinating my generals I'd like to be able to annihilate them.
Didn't find any options to mess with them but perhaps I just missed it.
Graphics are very nice, naval battles are somewhat more interesting now in my book and the diplomacy seems better as well.
Can't wait to get playing again tonight. (these are the days I detest working)
|
Been playing for 4 1/2 hours, no prologue (ofc), here are my points:
Pros:
- new agents are AWESOME and their upgrades are fantastic. So many different things they can do, it's wonderful.
- tech tree, upgrade tree etc are great.
- diplomacy is better and more varied (and more necessary)
- having a limit on the amount of armies, having it tied to the generals, having the generals part of different political families, it's all incredibly brilliant. I absolutely love these features.
- naval battles are hard but extremely fun once you get the hang of things.
- the fact that you have different families within your own faction is extremely intriguing and the fact that you can assassinate or spread rumours about your rivals is hilarious (I know this is copied from another game but I can't remember which)
- God damn it is NOT easy to expand, that is fucking awesome. Playing as Athens on vh (because I consider any easier difficulty the equivalent of wearing a dunce cap), and any direction I try to expand in is bristling with troops. Even the islands of Rhodes and Knossos are stacked with troops. You have to really prepare yourself or catch an aggressor off balance.
Cons:
- The UI is indeed bizarrely restrictive and less informative and useful than the Rome 1 UI. But more in line with Shogun, it's kind of got a 'streamlined FPS' feel to it. Which is weird because with how little this game explains itself in general, it's not exactly noob friendly! However it's not that confusing if you have played upwards of 1000 hours on total war games as any true fan should have 
- My machine is struggling with it - quite big slowdown on the campaign map with high settings although good in battles - didn't experience this with Shogun but did with Empire.
- No merchants makes me a sad panda. They were fairly useless but they looked cool >:D. I hoped they would bring over the idea from M2TW.
However I haven't played that much, I'm sure there are more pros and cons to be discovered. I have to say that many of the complaints I have seen from people make me think they haven't played previous total war games. Especially the comments about AI. If I had to say what this game feels like, it is something like a mix between Shogun 2 and Empire. It's definitely one of the more ambitious games.
|
...are there less provinces? the map feels smaller than in the original RW.
|
United Kingdom3685 Posts
Am I the only one that thinks the first-person control of siege weapons is the coolest (although mostly useless) feature? I've only played a couple of hours of the prologue, but I spent the majority of the first siege battle giggling while lobbing rocks at people.
|
Am I missing something? I can't find the units that should be garrisoned inside my cities (those buildings that say "provides x and y units for garrison")?
|
On September 04 2013 18:14 Sub40APM wrote:
...are there less provinces? the map feels smaller than in the original RW.
It depends how you count it. Rome 1 had 50, Rome 2 has 57 which are divided in 173 regions. I think the map feels smaller because of the cloudy, ugly fog of war.
By the way isnt that unrealistic? I mean yea it is around 300 b.c. but countries like rome or the Greece at least knowed where who is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
