EPTTotal War: Rome II - Page 50
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Godwrath
Spain10126 Posts
| ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
edit: Ok, and now I've got to take a shit on the UI some too. We've got this massive box with massive unit cards, so big in fact that when you have a lot of recruitment options they have to be split in two rows that you click back and forth from. REALLY?! | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On September 05 2013 07:16 TSORG wrote: so whats the verdict? It's a great game but not perfect. Really deserves its 8 to 8.5 scores as of release state. Fast forward some months and give modders some time to polish the game in a direction you like and the game has a lot of potential. Basically... its typical Creative Assembly product so base it on whether you like their other products or not. | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
 | ||
|
aXa
France748 Posts
Also, my first civil war: Rome just passed to senate loyalist, with 3 full armies of legions. I think i'm pretty fucked. | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On September 05 2013 07:05 Jockmcplop wrote: Its not just the speed but the lack of an ability to keep formation thats a big problem. Why no guard mode? That's the most effective way to play as Rome, letting the enemy come to you and using their excellent defensive skills. As it is the units just all mesh together into a massive chaotic melee for a few seconds then its over. Tactics are literally nonexistent. you think its bad as rome? try to maintain a phalanx line as a Greek/Sucessor style army. "LOL YOU MAKE LINE? I MOVE HALF AN INCH TO TO THE LEFT" its just beyond silly. I think I am going to go back to playing Napoleon or Shogun for a bit, its just too dumb to watch primitive Athenian/Spartan armies outmuscle Macedon/Epirus because the game doesnt have a good mechanic for phalanax battle. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9653 Posts
On September 05 2013 08:00 Sub40APM wrote: you think its bad as rome? try to maintain a phalanx line as a Greek/Sucessor style army. "LOL YOU MAKE LINE? I MOVE HALF AN INCH TO TO THE LEFT" its just beyond silly. I think I am going to go back to playing Napoleon or Shogun for a bit, its just too dumb to watch primitive Athenian/Spartan armies outmuscle Macedon/Epirus because the game doesnt have a good mechanic for phalanax battle. I think its bad for any faction who isn't barbarian TBH. Defensive formations are a vital part of war, but its as if they don't even exist here. Guard mode was brilliant, because it basically means 'hold your formation and do not break, until you are dead or routed.' This is how war was meant to be. I'm pretty sure guard mode will be patched or modded in to the game, because at the moment its all about attacking, and i'm sure some people, like me, will want to be able to play defensively too. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On September 05 2013 08:00 Sub40APM wrote: you think its bad as rome? try to maintain a phalanx line as a Greek/Sucessor style army. "LOL YOU MAKE LINE? I MOVE HALF AN INCH TO TO THE LEFT" its just beyond silly. I think I am going to go back to playing Napoleon or Shogun for a bit, its just too dumb to watch primitive Athenian/Spartan armies outmuscle Macedon/Epirus because the game doesnt have a good mechanic for phalanax battle. Hmm, when I put my athenian hoplites in phalanx they never lose their rigidity. The enemy mills around them but they stay strong and true. However I do see what you're saying, in Rome 1 the phalanxes felt much more solid and the edging forward thing was done better. Still I think you just need to get used to it because it's not that bad. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13955 Posts
very disinterested with the starting situations with a lot of factions as well. the germanics are stuck with the same 3 units (club levy is junk so its really just the 2) for a good third of the game and the Carthaginians get war deced worthlessly with roma almost instantly. they also get wardeced with random other african and iberian nations but your client states can deal with them long enough for you to subjugate rome (beacuse they have nothing other then shitty hastali units). rome 1 was a lot smaller feel but at least then you had clearer settlement construction and were able to tech up to at least competent mid range units before long. right now you have to do the important warrring with ilrelevent shitty armies with javilenmen and generic militia type units. I'm sure mods will aliviate this issue but its nothing short of disappointing anyway. Rome starts out way to big at the start and very uninteresting to me to have to deal with almost identical armies to the north and slightly different armies to the south. The Carthaginians started out with a unit of elephants at the start of rome 1 and the first battle you had with rome in the south there was far more interesting then anything thats going on now. I can see a ton of the improvements in the battles I'm fighting now and they're a lot more entertaining and close then I think I've ever played before but it doesn't change the fact that I'm basically fighting the enemy with the same troops they have and trying to make some benefit out of that. Spamming skirmishers with flaming javs and pressing rapid fire is really cool anyway though. There is a lot of things mods can do to make this game really cool. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
On September 05 2013 04:25 sc4k wrote: Just had my first massive battle (on v hard). You guys who are complaining about quick battles I have no idea what you're talking about because it was incredibly tooth and nail in this fight. My athenians vs the defenders of rhodes. Constant back and forth, with different lines having different success, the archers and slingers attempting to outmanoeuvre each other and take advantage of the cover of mighty phalanxes. In the end the battle tipped in my favour after I sent 4 of my finest hoplite units into the centre of the hurricane...to stand with phalanx formation in front of their core. They charged me and my men were losing but they held out just long enough for my flanks to win their battles and come in from the sides. A grand day for the forces of athens. I think pitting player against player with not-low-grade units would be an incredibly enlightening experience. Few tactics, little micro, pure slogfest. I'd imagine if it weren't for flanking, disparities between units, and intelligent use of special abilities, battles would take a ton longer than people are reporting. "A-moving" a couple units into another couple of units of equal strength with no interruption will take more than a couple minutes to resolve. On gravitas and faction families/civil wars: CA really should have explained this to us beforehand. This is a totally new feature that merits elucidation. It's like they dropped us into houses with family members conspiring on the level of the Sopranos, lol. | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On September 05 2013 08:27 sc4k wrote: Hmm, when I put my athenian hoplites in phalanx they never lose their rigidity. The enemy mills around them but they stay strong and true. However I do see what you're saying, in Rome 1 the phalanxes felt much more solid and the edging forward thing was done better. Still I think you just need to get used to it because it's not that bad. your hoplites dont have the long pikes though, I think its partially a graphics issue and partially an engine issue. When someone moves 3 soldiers to the 'left'/'right' of a pike phalanax it shouldnt require the entire unit to raise their pikes to re position, they should just be able to pivot left/pivot right. basically its impossible to fight the 'classical Macedonian' style of a big line of long pikes acting as a kind of anvil and cavalary clipping in at the wings because when the ai auto-aggros on the first unit it sees (anyone else see that, you go out to scout with one cavalary and the ai instantly breaks its formation to chase after that guy) any kind of long pike formation you set up is useless. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
On September 05 2013 08:27 sc4k wrote: Hmm, when I put my athenian hoplites in phalanx they never lose their rigidity. The enemy mills around them but they stay strong and true. However I do see what you're saying, in Rome 1 the phalanxes felt much more solid and the edging forward thing was done better. Still I think you just need to get used to it because it's not that bad. If you run or "Rapid Advance" with Hoplites, they drop the phalanx formation they were in. Rome I phalanxes were infinitely more solid, longer spears notwithstanding. On September 05 2013 07:05 Jockmcplop wrote: Its not just the speed but the lack of an ability to keep formation thats a big problem. Why no guard mode? That's the most effective way to play as Rome, letting the enemy come to you and using their excellent defensive skills. As it is the units just all mesh together into a massive chaotic melee for a few seconds then its over. Tactics are literally nonexistent. I've not discovered a way to toggle "Loose Formation." Has anyone found that yet? It's not unheard of; modernized units in Fall of the Samurai didn't have it either. | ||
|
aXa
France748 Posts
I just defeated the Senate loyalist, after losing most of italia to them. It was very dire at some point, i lost many armies and battle. Then I was able to crush them in two decisive battles that were very close. Had a "Rome recaptured" video, a "Civil War Ends" as well as a "Triumph" one. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
It doesn't really matter, though. Spartan hoplites are hilarious. They just bulldoze everything. Also, I am not even bothering to use phalanx formation. It is far easier to use the Spartans as mobile infantry. When I start seeing a lot of cavalry, I my change my mind. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
I just won't bother with it, honestly. Maybe when I see cataphracts.  | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13955 Posts
On September 05 2013 10:04 cLAN.Anax wrote: Phalanx formation is more defensive this time around. I remember seeing people use it more offensively in Rome I, but it seems to be more of a focused, "stand your ground" ability in this game. I just won't bother with it, honestly. Maybe when I see cataphracts. cataphracts are the most insane thing really this time around. in rome 1 you could legitimatly smash though with enough horse's but a single cataphract unit can almost break an entire flank on its own. I gotta play a nation that actualy use's archers. getting realy tired of this javalin short range game. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
On September 05 2013 10:06 Sermokala wrote: cataphracts are the most insane thing really this time around. in rome 1 you could legitimatly smash though with enough horse's but a single cataphract unit can almost break an entire flank on its own. I gotta play a nation that actualy use's archers. getting realy tired of this javalin short range game. What, you don't like slingers' piddly for damage?  | ||
|
aXa
France748 Posts
On September 05 2013 10:14 cLAN.Anax wrote: What, you don't like slingers' piddly for damage? Slinger are actually quite effective. If you let your army standing under their fire, even praetorians in testudo formation start to melt away. Especially if they come in big numbers, which they usually do. Also, I think they have better range than usual javelin skirmisher. | ||
|
InToTheWannaB
United States4770 Posts
| ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
On September 05 2013 10:19 InToTheWannaB wrote: Guys you can use the phalanx almost the same way as rome 1, but unlike rome 1 u cant put them in phalanx mode and click attack. This time around u need to put them in phalanx mode and just issue a movement order and let them walk into the enemy. If u click attack they break formation and just charge. Its a bit more simple too maintain a phalanx line in Rome 2 honestly then even in rome 1. If u just click behind the enemy the whole line will move as one and stab whatever in front of them. They just dont get charge bonuses That's immensely helpful. I actually remember doing that in Rome I, now that you mention it. Thank you for the tip! | ||
| ||
