cRPG

Other Games => Total War Series => Topic started by: Lt_Anders on September 05, 2013, 08:27:16 pm

Title: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 05, 2013, 08:27:16 pm
Lets do it this way to keep the other thread free of out misgivings. Post your reviews/Critiques/etc here.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: bilwit on September 07, 2013, 03:28:43 am
game is bad 0/10
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: The_Slim on September 08, 2013, 06:06:05 am
They just need to fix the team quickmatch, impossible to do 3v3 with mates, other than that I have no problems with it.  Campaign is good
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lactating Vegetables on September 08, 2013, 04:05:06 pm
Its, ok. Campaign Ai needs to stop spamming slingers, sieges need improving (can win them without entering the settlement) and a couple other bits and pieces other wise i'd say its a pretty nice game. Personally i'd rate it at 7/10
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 09, 2013, 04:14:58 pm
Its quite alright. I basically pirated, cause im really only interested in the campaign. The random Total War battles and with other people alone dont ammuse me for years anymore. I played as one of the Greek citystates (Athens). I was rather disappointed that they had only one acctually useful unitclass "hoplites". None else. No proper cav, no real ranged, no nothing. Just sticked the armies full with hoplites and steamrolled over everybody.

Id give the game 7/10 too. Its more of a 25€ worth game imo. I was expecting a lot more, but what they finally made isnt half bad either.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Turboflex on September 11, 2013, 03:20:44 pm
downvote anders if you are unhappy with quality of rtw2 release!
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Arthur_ on September 11, 2013, 05:48:59 pm
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 11, 2013, 10:20:28 pm
My review:
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 12, 2013, 01:40:42 am
The mark of a true ninja, assassinating an object while remaining invisible.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on September 22, 2013, 06:03:54 pm
Diplomacy sucks, politics suck, alot of poor game design choices, missing features/unfinished features. The game's a mess, boring, and a discrace to the Total war series... 3/10
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 22, 2013, 07:12:45 pm
after seeing angry joe s review, i can honestly say that this would be the last game i would want to buy.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bittersteel on September 22, 2013, 07:18:28 pm
Diplomacy sucks, politics suck, alot of poor game design choices, missing features/unfinished features. The game's a mess, boring, and a discrace to the Total war series... 3/10


Let me add a thing to the list. The entire game sucks. It is absolutely fucking terrible, the AI both on map and battle is horrible.

And to add;

(click to show/hide)

That looks fucking nothing like ingame. The video where they show that off they say "It's still early alpha it's gonna look much better when it's released." What the hell happened to the grapichs?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 22, 2013, 07:20:39 pm

Let me add a thing to the list. The entire game sucks. It is absolutely fucking terrible, the AI both on map and battle is horrible.

And to add;

(click to show/hide)

That looks fucking nothing like ingame. The video where they show that off they say "It's still early alpha it's gonna look much better when it's released." What the hell happened to the grapichs?

dont tell me you believe anything that they show in trailers. remember dragon age origins?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 22, 2013, 07:25:02 pm
What was wrong with DAO trailers?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 22, 2013, 07:35:09 pm

Let me add a thing to the list. The entire game sucks. It is absolutely fucking terrible, the AI both on map and battle is horrible.


I sometimes wonder whether people have either put RTW on a pedestal or played to many mods to remember what the original game was like. In it's state now it's still buggy as hell with the BAI and CAI being pretty bad most of the time and making some odd decisions or no decisions at all.

Rome 2 is pretty similar to Rome 1 in terms of CAI + BAI in my opinion. My only qualm is slinger spam armies but that seemed a lot more common earlier in my campaign and seems to have petered out now.

Edit:
Watching the angry joe review I honestly can say I haven't experienced a bunch of his issues. Like the complaint about never been declared war on or never facing big army stacks. My Egypt campaign has been the complete opposite of that. I've been declared war on tons of times and have to keep 3 full stacks across the rear of my territory because I've been invaded more than once by full stack armies.

Most of the bugs I've not experienced. But then that's more due to fortune I suppose. As for saying its worse than Empire for BAI + CAI. That's just stupidity. BAI in Empire is the worst I've ever seen it with enemy armies bugging out on the edges of maps. It was impossible to be invaded by sea and the economy was so borked you could earn millions even when completing mismanaging it.

Siege AI in Rome 2 is bad. But then it always has been and it was only improved in Shogun because they simplified it to climbing over walls with hooks (and even that took them all of Empire and Napoleon to get right).

The flag capture points are definitely bull shit. I think those should have been done away with after Shogun. They never really worked even then.

I suppose all I'm saying is that, yes there are bugs, but most of them are issues that have always been there and I think people were a little naive in thinking CA would have magically changed and would release a game that didn't need 6 months + of patches to get right. They haven't done that since Medieval 1.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on September 22, 2013, 08:01:57 pm
It seems they removed many aspects of the game, or just never got round to finishing them. The start up menu initially showed the factions leader or general, upon clicking that faction, which for some reason, was swapped for the simple background we have now. The majority of the ancient wonders of the world which were meant to be in game, are nothing but empty squares on the battle map. Upon clicking units, an avatar of the units commander popped up in the corner, which was also removed (not that I like these animated avatars, I fucking hate them). It seems they've only just added fire to damaged buildings, which is clearly seen in the Carthage demo. Wasn't the game meant to be around 35 GB or so, it's not even 20 GB, makes you wonder what else they ripped out of the game...


Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 22, 2013, 08:12:52 pm
It seems they removed many aspects of the game, or just never got round to finishing them. The start up menu initially showed the factions leader or general, upon clicking that faction, which for some reason, was swapped for the simple background we have now. The majority of the ancient wonders of the world which were meant to be in game, are nothing but empty squares on the battle map. Upon clicking units, an avatar of the units commander popped up in the corner, which was also removed (not that I like these animated avatars, I fucking hate them). It seems they've only just added fire to damaged buildings, which is clearly seen in the Carthage demo. Wasn't the game meant to be around 35 GB or so, it's not even 20 GB, makes you wonder what else they ripped out of the game...

Anyone bothered looking at Patch 3 Notes? (http://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Total_War_ROME_II:_Patch_3)

Not the full list, but some interesting points:
(click to show/hide)

They are removing flags, except for like 1-2 instances now. Slowing down combat and the blobing mentality. Rebalancing the rather shitty squalor/food consumption.

But the most intersting are the 3 bolded ones: 2 are related to not fixing AI, but making the AI kill you when they bum rush your flags....

And, the last one: Traits working as intended: THEY FORGOT TO GIVE SPEARS BONUS VERSUS CAVALRY. How the HELL do you do that?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bittersteel on September 22, 2013, 11:59:05 pm
dont tell me you believe anything that they show in trailers. remember dragon age origins?


Did you watch the trailer? :o It certainly looked like a battle from the game (Except the grapichs).
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 02:41:29 pm

Did you watch the trailer? :o It certainly looked like a battle from the game (Except the grapichs).

no, just no.

trailer shows an epic action with awesome looking spells and stuff.

in game, however it is a sorry shallow excuse for combat system, running on extremely outdated modified aurora engine, littered with bugs.
combat in dragon age origins is a snore fest. story telling was good however, and characters were very well done. graphics and music were also nice.

imo dao didnt deserve 9/10, id give it like 7/10.

this is how it should have looked like:

and this is how it really looks.

NEVER EVER TRUST TRAILERS.


Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 03:13:40 pm
The former is a cinematic trailer. Obviously (only to some it seems) that isn't what the gameplay looks like....


Quote
imo dao didnt deserve 9/10, id give it like 7/10.
Yeah, and evidently most people disagree with you.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 23, 2013, 03:18:07 pm
You really looked at a CGI trailer and believed it?

Anyway, I quite enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins combat, comboing different spell effects and levelling up all the characters to fulfill a role in the party. It was reminiscient of Infinity Engine games, in that it was semi-isometric strategic combat. If you were expecting anything else you should've read even their marketing pitch when they said it's a modern version of Baldur's Gate.

For me DA:O is a 8 or 8.5, never tried DA2 due to Origins and general bad reception. For a CGI trailer it was actually relatively accurate in showing it's a party based RPG with a few different classes. But obviously CGI trailers are completely different from the actual gameplay.

I remember the Dragon Age crew releasing some actual gameplay videos prior to release and if my memory serves it did represent the game fairly accurately, but some things may have changed since it was like a year prior to release.

In related news look at this awesome gameplay from Cyberpunk 2077:
(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:18:55 pm
The former is a cinematic trailer. Obviously (only to some it seems) that isn't what the gameplay looks like....

Yeah, and evidently most people disagree with you.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

metacritic is know to give great scores to about any game, as long as devs or publishers fork out the cash to cover it. dragon age origins is a good game, but not that super awesome quality-defining rpg they tell us it is.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 03:20:57 pm
I wasn't aware devs and publishers were forking out the cash to the 500 user reviewers.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Turboflex on September 23, 2013, 03:22:18 pm
Empire Total War came out at 90+ score too. CA really knows how to work over reviewers.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 23, 2013, 03:25:40 pm
metacritic is know to give great scores to about any game, as long as devs or publishers fork out the cash to cover it. dragon age origins is a good game, but not that super awesome quality-defining rpg they tell us it is.

Empire Total War came out at 90+ score too. CA really knows how to work over reviewers.

Shame neither forked out any cash for the sequels, which are both honestly worse games:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/total-war-rome-ii

And yeah, professional reviewers practically always give good scores if it's a high budget title. User scores give very low if the game is an unworthy successor. The true score is usually found right between the two.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:27:14 pm
I wasn't aware devs and publishers were forking out the cash to the 500 user reviewers.

those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 23, 2013, 03:28:48 pm
those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.

Out of curiosity, how do you find Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:35:13 pm
Out of curiosity, how do you find Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale?
those are old classics, revolutionary in their time. at that time, point and click combat was not so overused.

its 2009 ffs. sorry that my standarts are not low enough to enjoy combat in this game, because i would expect better.
maybe they should stop pumping graphics, and look at things from a gameplay perspective.

the only newer game with great combat system was risen, and two worlds II.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bittersteel on September 23, 2013, 03:38:54 pm
I meant the rome total war trailer -.- Not that game whatever it is.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 03:40:58 pm
those are the sheep that find this game s combat good, because the dont know any better.
So the definition of sheep is that they don't know much about RPG combat. I also wasn't aware that metacritic was for rating combat.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 23, 2013, 03:45:43 pm
those are old classics, revolutionary in their time. at that time, point and click combat was not so overused.

its 2009 ffs. sorry that my standarts are not low enough to enjoy combat in this game, because i would expect better.
maybe they should stop pumping graphics, and look at things from a gameplay perspective.

the only newer game with great combat system was risen, and two worlds II.

It's what I figured. Real-time with pause combat systems can actually be really good, if done well and lead to extremely strategic gameplay and gameplay that can be fairly hectic, because doing stuff in the wrong time can get you killed.

It's also in my opinion the best way to make a combat system for an RPG where you control multiple characters, but I guess some find that a chore. Sure Risen had fairly nice combat(don't really agree with Two Worlds 2), but try and do that combat with 4-6 characters where you control each one. It's either turn-based or real-time with pause.

I find both systems equally attractive. X-com showcases good turn-based. Icewind Dale 2 and Dragon Age: Origins does real-time with pause. If you don't like the idea of party-based RPG's then that's fine, but looking at the most funded video games on kickstarter I can safely say a lot of people seem to disagree.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:46:58 pm
So the definition of sheep is that they don't know much about RPG combat. I also wasn't aware that metacritic was for rating combat.

where did i say metacritic rated combat?

look, i am not saying it is a good game, it is, and i am sure lots of effort went into it, but i cant really stand how are people giving this 9/10 and 10/10.
it is an overrated game, that is what i am saying.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 23, 2013, 03:52:37 pm
the only newer game with great combat system was risen, and two worlds II.

Risen was pretty clunky I found. Two worlds 2 was good fun though. Mind you the story was so bad and standard on both that I only played about a quarter of them.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:53:16 pm
It's what I figured. Real-time with pause combat systems can actually be really good, if done well and lead to extremely strategic gameplay and gameplay that can be fairly hectic, because doing stuff in the wrong time can get you killed.

It's also in my opinion the best way to make a combat system for an RPG where you control multiple characters, but I guess some find that a chore. Sure Risen had fairly nice combat(don't really agree with Two Worlds 2), but try and do that combat with 4-6 characters where you control each one. It's either turn-based or real-time with pause.

I find both systems equally attractive. X-com showcases good turn-based. Icewind Dale 2 and Dragon Age: Origins does real-time with pause.

x-com is a bit different cup of tea, well turn based all together. we really dont play turn based games for immersion of action.

the problem is how lazy the combat in dao looks. like if it was an afterthought. repetitive and boring.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 03:54:15 pm
where did i say metacritic rated combat?

look, i am not saying it is a good game, it is, and i am sure lots of effort went into it, but i cant really stand how are people giving this 9/10 and 10/10.
it is an overrated game, that is what i am saying.
You said people gave it a good score because they don't know better. Maybe they didn't rate the combat... Which was completely fine btw, and DAO is underrated if anything.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 23, 2013, 03:55:30 pm
the problem is how lazy the combat in dao looks. like if it was an afterthought. repetitive and boring.

I liked the combat. The main problem I had with DA:O was it was actually quite hard. Those dragons were damn annoying to kill if you misjudged how much healing you'd need.

Everything else about DA:O was awesome.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:55:58 pm
Risen was pretty clunky I found. Two worlds 2 was good fun though. Mind you the story was so bad and standard on both that I only played about a quarter of them.

i know, i never said i enjoyed 2worlds2 for story.

risen clunky? why?
it required use of strategy and skill. and i think thats why i liked it. you could defeat ghoul at level 1 with nothing but stick in your hand, if you were skilled enough.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on September 23, 2013, 03:57:27 pm
This one made me laugh...

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Quote
CA has proofed they have the drive and the might to achieve a masterpiece such as Rome, and they did it again with Rome 2.

:shock:
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 23, 2013, 03:58:06 pm
Something about it just seemed slow and unresponsive. It's been a while so I can't remember specifics and I didn't spend long enough on it.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 03:59:24 pm
You said people gave it a good score because they don't know better. Maybe they didn't rate the combat... Which was completely fine btw, and DAO is underrated if anything.

yeah sure keep telling that to yourself.

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 23, 2013, 03:59:31 pm
I liked the combat. The main problem I had with DA:O was it was actually quite hard. Those dragons were damn annoying to kill if you misjudged how much healing you'd need.

Everything else about DA:O was awesome.

Then again a lot of the dragons (possibly all of them except the last one?) were optional bosses and not that hard really if you were prepared to fight a dragon.

Dragon Age: Origins is not underrated. It's not exactly overrated either. It is a really good game, but not a perfect one.

Anyway, I've derailed this enough.

Rome 2 is still bad.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 04:01:11 pm
yeah sure keep telling that to yourself.

If you haven't noticed, it's you everyone disagrees with.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 23, 2013, 04:05:58 pm
If you haven't noticed, it's you everyone disagrees with.

i havent seen anyone agree with you the game is underrated either.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 23, 2013, 04:42:08 pm
If you haven't noticed, it's you everyone disagrees with.

Oh ffs Xant, not again. Stop baiting him, so that he would make himself look like a retard. Can you ever make a post where you arent being a witty douchebag, whose sole exsistence in these forums is proving your own opinions to be the only correct ones. I swear man, you are one of the shittiest posters here. You may be smart and you dont go full retard like some, but for some strange reason you always have the need to go overboard with the edginess.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 23, 2013, 05:09:46 pm
He doesn't need my help to look like a retard.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 23, 2013, 05:20:37 pm
Unfortunately true dat.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Adamar on September 23, 2013, 06:12:32 pm
People like Nightmare798 are the reason Dragon age has been turning into a button mashing franchise.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Molly on September 23, 2013, 08:03:32 pm
DA:O was an epic role-playing game cuz it was actually a full classic role-playing game. It was what RPG used to stand for: epic story with proper storytelling, party-based combat which can be fine-tuned with the settings (not to mention the tactics options) and nice graphics and music.
You didn't like it? Fine. Nobody cares. Overrated? Surely not. Underrated? Probably neither...

I like Rome2 with the new patch better.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 24, 2013, 12:59:27 pm
People like Nightmare798 are the reason Dragon age has been turning into a button mashing franchise.

as opposed to click that and watch it die franchise eh?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: pingpong on September 24, 2013, 02:20:27 pm
This game is streamlined pile of poo, CA devs were like: hey lets remove every feature that added depth to the game because we thinks its just BOORING and NOT NECESSARY because its hip to be so chic and MINIMALISTIC so STREAMLINE EVERYTHING, and lets make battles last 5min because this game is TOTALLY NOT about battles that took effort, time and planning to win, not cap some gay ass flag, also the game runs like my 89yr. old grandpa with a heart defect. -1/10

 
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 24, 2013, 03:25:19 pm
Started an MP campaign yesterday. So far turn times are really fast and no connection issues at all. A bit of lag on some battles but usually only massive cluster fuck peasant army ones. Will see how slow turns are in 100 turns but for now it seems fine.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Adamar on September 24, 2013, 08:34:20 pm
as opposed to click that and watch it die franchise eh?

No, as opposed to strategic thinking and unit combination, that you dont do when you're too busy clicking on the enemy.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 24, 2013, 09:38:01 pm
No, as opposed to strategic thinking and unit combination, that you dont do when you're too busy clicking on the enemy.

there is no real strategy in combat of dragon age origins.

mage: spam aoe spells as much as possible.
warrior: spam shield bash and similar skills as much as possible.
rogue: spam dirty fighting as much as possible.

traps are useless because enemy rarely goes out and attacks you.

so it boils down to this:

send warrior to tank and use rouge to either: backstab, or stand back and spam ranged skills.
keep mage back and use all your spells and chug on mana potions.

rinse and repeat.

THATS COMPLETE STRATEGY GUIDE! CONGRATS! YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY WON THE GAME!
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 24, 2013, 10:14:47 pm
enemy rarely goes out and attacks you.

so it boils down to this:

send warrior to tank and use rouge to either: backstab, or stand back and spam ranged skills.
keep mage back and use all your spells and chug on mana potions.

rinse and repeat.

THATS COMPLETE STRATEGY GUIDE! CONGRATS! YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY WON THE GAME!

Not sure what game you were playing. Enemy always came and attacked me.

Also not sure how this differs from most games. Even warband is an element of this. Maybe go play some 10 hour fps games more?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bulzur on September 24, 2013, 10:19:57 pm
Could you please stop posting unrelevant things Nightmare798... this is a Rome2 topic, in case you haven't noticed.

There's something called private messages (PM) for your discussions with Adamar. And don't bring the "he started it", even if it's true, it's childish.



Back to Rome 2 :

- The launch was unfitting of any awaited game : 3/10
- The few patches they brought relatively quickly made it back to a decent level : 7/10

Still taking a few points back for the obvious unpolished game (unit cards forming two lines, where one is incomplete at max stack, unit cards being just ugly, with an hp bar instead of remaining units/total units,...), and a lot of things being just dumbed down.

With some good mod support, i believe it can reach a solid 9/10.
I don't regret having pre-ordered this game at only 15% reduction.


(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 24, 2013, 10:34:25 pm
Not sure what game you were playing. Enemy always came and attacked me.

Also not sure how this differs from most games. Even warband is an element of this. Maybe go play some 10 hour fps games more?

sure, i dont enjoy poorly made rpg combat system, so i must be the call off duty/battlefield fan with attention span of a dog, right? RIGHT???

you know combat in this game reminds me of mmos. i would go as far as to say they just copied wow combat, gave you a party, and cut the skill tree pretty short.

Code: [Select]
Could you please stop posting unrelevant things Nightmare798... this is a Rome2 topic, in case you haven't noticed.

There's something called private messages (PM) for your discussions with Adamar. And don't bring the "he started it", even if it's true, it's childish.

very well, i will heed this for i agree i am sorta thread jacking. as for who started it, i believe it is me who started the discussion about combat in dragon age origins, just to clarify it.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Adamar on September 24, 2013, 10:37:26 pm
there is no real strategy in combat of dragon age origins.

mage: spam aoe spells as much as possible.
warrior: spam shield bash and similar skills as much as possible.
rogue: spam dirty fighting as much as possible.

traps are useless because enemy rarely goes out and attacks you.

so it boils down to this:

send warrior to tank and use rouge to either: backstab, or stand back and spam ranged skills.
keep mage back and use all your spells and chug on mana potions.

rinse and repeat.

THATS COMPLETE STRATEGY GUIDE! CONGRATS! YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY WON THE GAME!

That's true in DA2. In origins you had way more builds and troop combinations to try than that, unless you didn't bother playing outside the box. It was your choice what type of armor and weapons your warriors, rogues, and mages used, with the right build you didn't need warriors at all, but you had to adapt your strategy, tie up the enemy in a great many ways and learn how to control the fight with what you had at your disposal. DA 2 was the simplistic bullshit you described, where sadly it all comes down to how much damage you inflict on the enemy before your party dies.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 24, 2013, 11:00:07 pm
Ok, well You know, I think I should make a poll now that the game has been out for a bit.

Also, take your Dragon Age shit to a different topic. We don't care, we want to praise or Bash Rome...
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 25, 2013, 01:02:58 am
Just had a friendly game of co-op with a fellow ninja. This is what happened in a few hours worth of gameplay.

1. Overall shitty performance. My Napoleon and Shogun 2 battles run way better.
2. AI doing the classic "rush the flag through the defenders line"-tactic.
3. AI doing the classic "stand still and turn your back to the enemy  while being shot at"-tactic
4. AI doing the classic "abandon our last city, otherwise we might lose our army"-tactic, resulting in nothing at all.
5.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)

6. Syracuse with the world's largest moshpit, and their allies doing the largest congo line.
(click to show/hide)

Needless to say we declared war on everyone out of boredom, because there was no challenge still. We played on very hard. The we just quit because even that didn't make it any more interesting.

It's still bad pretty bad compared to previous titles. 6/10.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on September 25, 2013, 01:50:49 am
Dead game... :|
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 25, 2013, 07:20:34 pm
Did some screens aswell in Khorins example. I did(well, still kinda doing, but in a less motivated way now) the Athenian campaign.

Well now, took me a while, but I finally got here. Not because it was hard, but because I had other places to murder:
(click to show/hide)

A nice defensive position these lads have been at for maaaaany turns now. Althou Rome fell quite some time ago and they are very far from home now:
(click to show/hide)

Owned this place some time ago. Due to certain events I had to rush it and take craploads of towns in very few turns, eventually the entire area destabilized and went to complete hell, so I had to leave a huge chunk of it behind.
(click to show/hide)

I agree, this game is just pisspoor. Im playin in "hard" and I steamrolled over everyone, having very few bumps along the way. I played the other TW games in medium and got my arse so royally screwed I never even tried the higher difficulties. Its fucking hard difficulty and the AIs armies loosely still consist out of javelinthrowers and slingers with like 2-4 squads being acctually useful unittypes. Either I suddenly became a military genius or something is deeply wrong with the game.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 27, 2013, 02:37:46 pm
Well playing an MP campaign where another player controls the AI army makes things way more interesting. The guy I'm playing with invaded gaul and via some interesting tactical play both armies got utterly decimated. He only won because the timer ran out and he was defending. He only had 2 slinger units left and I had spear nobles.

Makes invading things much more tactical and diplomatic rather than steam rolling. Atm that mp campaign is the only way I'm playing RTW atm.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fredom on September 27, 2013, 07:08:48 pm
The game is making me sad at
All the damn time I wanna play PATCH -.-the moment...
PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fips on September 27, 2013, 08:52:15 pm
The game is making me sad at
All the damn time I wanna play PATCH -.-the moment...
PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH PATCH

Oh no, they are trying to fix things, how horrible!
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Leesin on September 27, 2013, 09:00:29 pm
As if it wasn't bad enough that they released a badly optimized, unbalanced and buggy game, they then have the nerve to try and fix it with patches, vile fucking scumbags.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 28, 2013, 12:21:34 pm
Oh no, they are trying to fix things, how horrible!
It is bad. They should have had the proper game in the release. Instead they tricked everybody into buying a fucking betaversion and decided to fufill their promises in a later date.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fips on September 28, 2013, 03:14:35 pm
It is bad. They should have had the proper game in the release. Instead they tricked everybody into buying a fucking betaversion and decided to fufill their promises in a later date.

Woulda shoulda coulda, they fucked up pretty badly and made me never ever buy one of their games again and probably a whole lot of other players decided that, too and now they are at least trying to fix it.
Also, i don't think they are going to fulfill any promises, because that would mean they'd have to throw over a lot of their gameplay decisions they made. What they need to do is to offer Modders a good way to mod their game so they can do whatever the fuck they wanna do so we can get a nice Rome2:Total Realism or whatever mods there will be (Because there will)
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: darmaster on September 28, 2013, 06:01:02 pm
i have to say, best total war game for battles was empire total war imo; best one for campaign, probably medieval 2. i didn't enjoy at all shogun 2, this one is just a little better (with patches), but yes, i'm disappointed too.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on September 28, 2013, 07:05:30 pm
Oh no, they are trying to fix things, how horrible!

you know this gave me an idea for joke

how many patches does it take to make total war rome 2 playable?

it should have been playable upon release.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Leesin on September 28, 2013, 07:49:26 pm
you know this gave me an idea for joke

how many patches does it take to make total war rome 2 playable?

it should have been playable upon release.

How many dicks does it take to fill up Nightmares fartbox?

Infinity

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 28, 2013, 08:42:26 pm
What happened to the age of limited patches?

Things were so much better back in the day. Hell, the console market mentality has invaded the damn PC market. Hype it up, get pre-orders, and then post release patchs to fix everything.(Probably because we have corporations now, and had far fewer back then)

Last game, truly, that I will pre-order. I was hoping that something would be good, but I just can't handle it.

AI continously puts there men in Forced march stance, so I'm getting tons and tons of Ambush battles, which is even EASIER to do that regular battles. I like it more than the flag battles, but man, AI is beyond help. Never felt like i HAD to go beyond Normal to enjoy a game. I have to play on HARD just to get SOMETHING from the game...
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on September 28, 2013, 08:42:57 pm
i have to say, best total war game for battles was empire total war imo; best one for campaign, probably medieval 2. i didn't enjoy at all shogun 2, this one is just a little better (with patches), but yes, i'm disappointed too.
Meh, never really felt attacked to Empire, nor Napoleonic. The one that I most deeply got engaged in was Medieval 2. Shogun 2 is what I would call a Total war average. I had average fun with it.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Molly on September 28, 2013, 10:15:51 pm
What I love about Medieval 2 and missed in every other TW that came after it, including and especially in Rome 2 considering how much more todays hardware could handle... Unit diversity!

Medieval 2 has so many cool units and you can actually differ them from each other on the battlefield... and you actually knew which building to build so you would get the units.
I still dunno how to get units out of buildings or just stumble across them by accident, so annoying. Why isn't there a proper tech tree somewhere?
Or is there actually one and I haven't found it yet?

Said it so many times before: Thank god I didn't pay full price for the pre-order or I would have been GTX mad...
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Christo on September 29, 2013, 05:52:04 am
http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/face-off-is-the-rts-genre-dying/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0 (http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/06/face-off-is-the-rts-genre-dying/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0)

lel
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Overdriven on September 29, 2013, 06:29:36 pm
i have to say, best total war game for battles was empire total war imo; best one for campaign, probably medieval 2. i didn't enjoy at all shogun 2, this one is just a little better (with patches), but yes, i'm disappointed too.

Did you not play empire on release? Half the battles ended up with the ai in a massive seething clump at the edge of the map. It's why I find it laughable when people say this is the worst release. Empire had a much much worse release in terms of quality.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Banok on September 29, 2013, 06:37:19 pm
well its easy for me to say shogun 2 is a way better game right now, but truth is I barely played shogun 2 at release I comparing it now.

rome 2 was a horrid release but I still think it will eventually be the best in series. alot of you hate it because you just cant handle changes to the formula, some were bad but many were actually huge improvements.

ie. there is actually depth and decisions to province buildings instead of just plain upgrading everything. "its different, must be for console my old friends!"

also the game's biggest problem is that its too easy. so WHAT THE FUCK is the logic of playing co-op instead of head to head  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fips on September 29, 2013, 06:46:57 pm
You play co-op to actually have a challenge in this game. I wouldn't bother playing co-op together with a friend. Maybe on the campaign map, but on the battlefield it is so much more interesting if it's you vs some other human being and not that ridiculous AI.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Banok on September 29, 2013, 06:54:50 pm
You play co-op to actually have a challenge in this game. I wouldn't bother playing co-op together with a friend. Maybe on the campaign map, but on the battlefield it is so much more interesting if it's you vs some other human being and not that ridiculous AI.

don't think you read what I wrote, co-op its you 2 vs ai so its basically at least TWICE as easy as singleplayer, more if your 2 neighbours who would normally be at war ;)
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fips on September 29, 2013, 06:58:41 pm
don't think you read what I wrote, co-op its you 2 vs ai so its basically at least TWICE as easy as singleplayer, more if your 2 neighbours who would normally be at war ;)

Well, head to head is co-op as well. You can play together with someone on the campaign map but at least have the 1v1 at battles, because that makes it an actual challenge.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 29, 2013, 07:02:44 pm
head to head can hardly be called "cooperative"
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Fips on September 29, 2013, 07:09:01 pm
head to head can hardly be called "cooperative"

You are cooperating with someone to make this game fun?  :D
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on September 29, 2013, 07:15:35 pm
You are cooperating with someone to make this game fun?  :D

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: [ptx] on October 01, 2013, 04:49:23 pm
So, this game is still sitting at 88 minutes played for me (crashed in prologue). Is it actually approaching worth-playing state right now?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 01, 2013, 06:01:14 pm
Refer to my post above yours.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Senni__Ti on October 01, 2013, 09:38:51 pm
So, this game is still sitting at 88 minutes played for me (crashed in prologue). Is it actually approaching worth-playing state right now?

I'd give it a go tbh, it's pretty fun for at least a couple of hours.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: [ptx] on October 01, 2013, 10:14:10 pm
Hmm, sounds like i'll give it another month of patching :lol:
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Adamar on October 02, 2013, 04:28:38 am
I dont think patching will change the core design concepts.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Voso on October 04, 2013, 08:13:15 am
I bought Rome 2 and loved it but everyone was saying Shogun 2 was soooo much better. I bought Shogun 2 and played it for a couple hours, I really didn't like it... I am probably never going to play it again... I don't understand..


Maybe Rome 2 is better to people new to the Total War series? The only other total war I played was Medieval 2, which I liked.


Anyways yeah, Rome 2 is great. It has some bugs but I haven't really experienced any and its been getting better every patch.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Leesin on October 04, 2013, 10:07:27 am
I bought Rome 2 and loved it but everyone was saying Shogun 2 was soooo much better. I bought Shogun 2 and played it for a couple hours, I really didn't like it... I am probably never going to play it again... I don't understand..


Maybe Rome 2 is better to people new to the Total War series? The only other total war I played was Medieval 2, which I liked.


Anyways yeah, Rome 2 is great. It has some bugs but I haven't really experienced any and its been getting better every patch.

Optimization wise Shogun 2 was miles ahead but I agree, Shogun 2 campaigns were boring. The MP was pretty good but thats a different matter, as Rome 2 doesnt include the Avatar mode to make way for the Total War Arena game which is basically like the avatar system.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on October 04, 2013, 11:00:28 am
Shogun 2 is AI-wise, performance-wise, general aesthetics-wise and UI funtionality-wise miles ahead.

The only downside some people have about it is that the game is too narrow in scope. Which I guess is a valid complaint. However, I really like all three campaign. Fall of the Samurai especially is fantastic.

EDIT: Oh, it also has bunch of features that I really love. LIke a god damn family tree. They really overhyped the Rome 2 internal politics shit.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Voso on October 04, 2013, 11:05:26 am
Optimization wise Shogun 2 was miles ahead but I agree, Shogun 2 campaigns were boring. The MP was pretty good but thats a different matter, as Rome 2 doesnt include the Avatar mode to make way for the Total War Arena game which is basically like the avatar system.

Oh, I never tried Shogun's multiplayer so that must be what I am missing. Plus, my computer is pretty good I guess since I've been running Rome 2 on high with no issues..
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: [ptx] on October 04, 2013, 11:24:37 am
Shogun 2 just has a perfect mix of having the best AI in the series so far, great visuals, good optimisation, sleek, yet functional UI, a ton of features and improvements over the previous games and really well working mechanics, both on the strategic and tactical maps.
If they had picked Rome's setting for that game, it would be pretty much perfect. But, as it it, it's just Japan.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 12:08:20 pm
Shogun 2 just has a perfect mix of having the best AI in the series so far, great visuals, good optimisation, sleek, yet functional UI, a ton of features and improvements over the previous games and really well working mechanics, both on the strategic and tactical maps.
If they had picked Rome's setting for that game, it would be pretty much perfect. But, as it it, it's just Japan.

shogun 2 ai is one of worst i ever seen.

they camp like fuck.
they use archers to kill your archers that are IN cover, and they succeed.
what is worse that they can snipe over walls and kill those who are not in cover.
their general is suicidal.
many more problems that i dont really have time to write down here.

imo, medieval 2 had better ai, even tho it was a little dumb at sieges. but its not like they went full retard everytime. sometimes they were quite competetent.

note: this is the list of things that bugged me when i played unpatched vanilla, it is highly probable that CA fixed those issues.

EDIT: they also cheat like fuck and have no upkeep. when you see an ai player with two provinces, and three full stacks of troops running around, you know something is wrong.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 12:14:18 pm
Most of those are not problems with the AI.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 12:34:20 pm
Most of those are not problems with the AI.

and where is the problem then huh?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: [ptx] on October 04, 2013, 12:41:49 pm
shogun 2 ai is one of worst i ever seen.

they camp like fuck.
It's called defending?
they use archers to kill your archers that are IN cover, and they succeed.
What? Also, not AI
what is worse that they can snipe over walls and kill those who are not in cover.
Archers can fire at stuff, so what? Also, not AI.
their general is suicidal.
This one is true, though.
many more problems that i dont really have time to write down here.

imo, medieval 2 had better ai, even tho it was a little dumb at sieges. but its not like they went full retard everytime. sometimes they were quite competetent.
Medieval 2 AI was super dumb 99% of the time. S2 AI is actually agressive and generally reacts to things you do.

note: this is the list of things that bugged me when i played unpatched vanilla, it is highly probable that CA fixed those issues.

EDIT: they also cheat like fuck and have no upkeep. when you see an ai player with two provinces, and three full stacks of troops running around, you know something is wrong.
Strategic AI, and depends on difficulty. Is sort of lame, true.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 12:46:11 pm


they fire at stuff? I AM ON HIGH GROUND ON A CASTLE BEHIND WALLS FFS!

ofc they can volley, but they should still hit very little.

also, cover doesnt have as big impact as it should.

about camping: yeah they have right to defend on the high ground, but this: oh look! human player! lets camp up here and wait till he loses his patience and retreats or gets killed tactic is pretty shitty excuse for ai tactics.

it is same as if they implemented camping ai in fps games and caled it a tactic.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 12:47:42 pm
You should probably figure out what "AI" means before you take part in a conversation about AI.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 12:54:10 pm
You should probably figure out what "AI" means before you take part in a conversation about AI.

ai is artifical inteligence of cpu player, how it acts and how it reacts to what you do.

and these are still ai issues. if an ai gets a bonuses that player doesnt, then it is ai related.

the range of cpu archers is abnormal when attacking, made so they can fuck over your defences the dirty way.

and dont tell me that archers outside under the castle should have same range as those who are on high ground in cover, because thats bs.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 12:57:04 pm
Computer-controlled archers don't get any extra range.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 01:00:05 pm
Computer-controlled archers don't get any extra range.

then how can you explain that when i am on siege defence, they can just dance right in front of my maximum range and start shooting, without my troops having even a chance to retaliate?

ofc there are more types of archers with different ranges, but no shooting unit should outrange another, that is on high ground.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 01:01:41 pm
then how can you explain that when i am on siege defence, they can just dance right in front of my maximum range and start shooting, without my troops having even a chance to retaliate?

ofc there are more types of archers with different ranges, but no shooting unit should outrange another, that is on high ground.
That is, once again, not an AI issue, since AI does not get extra range for their archers.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 01:09:36 pm
That is, once again, not an AI issue, since AI does not get extra range for their archers.

prove it, it happens to me all the time, so what gives?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 01:15:09 pm
prove it, it happens to me all the time, so what gives?
I suggest adjusting the amount of medicine you're taking.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on October 04, 2013, 01:28:18 pm
I suggest adjusting the amount of medicine you're taking.

there is really no way of leading a discussion with you. anyways ai in shogun is a dumbfuck level of stupid, and CA still has long ways to creating a decent non-cheating ai. cheats are no excuse for tactical shortcomings.

more like longer way, since ai i saw in rome 2 was epitome of fuck-up. whoever designed that ai should be executed.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: [ptx] on October 04, 2013, 01:37:18 pm
AI players don't get extra range for their archers, unless you're hallucinating.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on October 04, 2013, 01:43:29 pm
there is really no way of leading a discussion with you.
Can't discuss with someone who's seeing things that aren't there and then asks you to explain why it's happening.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Leesin on October 04, 2013, 02:18:11 pm
Nightmares carer needs to stop him from using the internet and tighten the straps on his padded helmet.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bulzur on October 05, 2013, 08:50:54 pm
Nightmare is finally muted, allelulia !  :mrgreen:

Makes me so happy i actually want to give this game an 8/10, after patch 3.
I really like the time period, and was a bit fed up of overpowered artillery in Empire Total War, so go Rome !
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Voncrow on October 07, 2013, 07:03:01 am
Games pretty decent when I play it, but far from a favorite, I'd give it a eight.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Pinche on October 15, 2013, 02:35:06 pm
Shitty game compared with his ancesters.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Knute on December 07, 2013, 09:59:48 am
I just got Rome 2 on a steam sale last weekend and the verdict so far:

It crashes often just like Empire used to when it first came out which is frustrating but at least the game seems to load up a lot faster than previous total war games.  The prologue was pretty good but I got to a point in the 3rd stage where I couldn't move past without the game crashing so skipped to the campaigns.

I've started a few campaigns on VH with no mods (Rome, Carthage and Macedon) and so far Rome/Macedon seemed pretty easy but Carthage had some interesting challenges.  Some of your north African territory that you might have started with or had to conquer in the original game is controlled by client states and they don't always trade with you or do what you need them to do. 

Compared to Europa Barbarorum there's a lot less cities so wars are over quickly but new territory can take more time to stabilize and home territories seem more rebellious so far.  It's expensive to maintain large armies so I have to shift them around quite a bit while building up my financial base.  Every town automatically comes with garrison troops but you can only move troops on the map with a general leading them.

I'm not too far into the game but so far the political stuff hasn't had much impact.  You get events once in a while where you have to make a choice which could lead positive or negative modifiers for a few turns.  For example, -4 public order in cities or tax bonuses.

The battle AI is alright in field battles when they have numerical superiority but kinda dumb when attacking or defending villages sometimes.

Exhibit A

(click to show/hide)

Exhibit B

(click to show/hide)

I still haven't spent that much time with the game but overall it's pretty fun, not perfect but very nice to look at.  I just got a 27" monitor for working at home plus upgraded my graphics card/memory so maybe being able to see more details in the battle has made the crashing easier to put up with.  The game definitely loads a lot faster than Shogun 2, which is nice as well. 

8/10

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Sir_Firebus on December 09, 2013, 06:15:17 am
I was besieged by a barbarian army and they surrounded me in a circle and my armies just stood there and I sped up to x4 speed for 60 minutes and I won, it was fucking hilarious.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: tkn123 on December 27, 2013, 02:34:13 pm
For me the game is pretty good.
At the start is was glitchy but they've sorted that mostly out now and the game runs smoothly.

There are 2 things though that i think are important for this game:

1. you need a good comp otherwise the graphics are shit and you can't experience the full game.
2. you need to play on legendary to make it more interesting, as its too easy otherwise. As i did a campaign with rome on hard and a slaughtered everyone, you know your going to win when you've got 16 full armies bearing down on the enemy.. there was no real challenge.
But then again, one thing took me by surprise: i don't know if anyone else has experienced civil war but when i was playing civil war broke out and out of know where 10 full armies of legionaries just appeared around one of my towns. where the fuck did they come from? that was the only real challenge i faced. While on legendary you can't save, so you pay for any risks you take - a lot more realistic  :shock:

And also get the blood and gore dlc   :)

9/10
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Strudog on December 30, 2013, 11:09:20 am
played the game for 5 mins, havent touched it for 4 months, have no intention, this was the last straw for me
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on December 30, 2013, 06:05:02 pm
Haven't touched the game since September, clocked around 50 hours or so, and most of that was trying to get the actual game to work...

Total War is finished, really can't understand how people are rating this game so high, especially the ones who have played previous games... :|
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on December 30, 2013, 07:50:42 pm
This game is the reason why my total war games are no longer found under favourites in my steam list.

I created a separate folder for them, so that I could have all of them in the same place without giving any undue credit to Rome II. Then again, I've only played it for 23 hours, last time was 27.9, so apart from the fundamental game design issues, it might be better, who cares.

As I've stated earlier, it's a 6/10. So mediocre it's painful.

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on December 30, 2013, 11:21:45 pm
So, now that the game is "patched" fully. I think I'll reset the votes so people can vote NOW how they believe it to be.

First voting was done right after patch 3, where it made it playable for most.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lizard_man on December 31, 2013, 04:41:02 am
Haven't played since I voted, and I won't be playing it even after the patches...

2/10... :|

Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Pinche on January 04, 2014, 01:17:07 pm
An insult for total war saga.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Bulzur on January 04, 2014, 03:43:25 pm
Deserves a little 7 with the right mods.

Without mods, probably a painfull 4.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Tibe on January 05, 2014, 07:55:04 pm
So how is Rome 2 these days? Stopped playing after patch number 2 and never looked back.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Andswaru on January 06, 2014, 01:12:22 am
the new and improved 8.1 (beta) patch is once again an amazing peach. Total shite to speak plainly. Trying again next month.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Arthur_ on January 14, 2014, 03:39:07 pm
can anyone give me the download link for the newest Rome II patch pls?
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Lt_Anders on January 14, 2014, 10:15:48 pm
can anyone give me the download link for the newest Rome II patch pls?

You have steam, it's done through steam.

If pirated, good luck. :twisted:
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Viktarion on February 17, 2014, 01:32:12 am
Since i like to auto resolve and also play on highest difficulty this is first total war series that it's impossible to do that, in all others it can work, sure you lose more troops then if lead alone, but with this one impossible, except for that its not that bad but also nothing so good like rome total war 1 was when it came out.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Nightmare798 on February 22, 2014, 10:20:00 am
Since i like to auto resolve and also play on highest difficulty this is first total war series that it's impossible to do that, in all others it can work, sure you lose more troops then if lead alone, but with this one impossible, except for that its not that bad but also nothing so good like rome total war 1 was when it came out.

I dont know why would anyone ever want to use auto-resolve in any total war game, except when in situations like besieging a city/castle against few (like 30 soldiers).

I will rather fuck up myself than let AI do it for me.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Xant on March 03, 2014, 01:32:15 pm
Because not everyone wants to play every single battle every single time.
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: Zanze on March 03, 2014, 03:44:29 pm
I dont know why would anyone ever want to use auto-resolve in any total war game, except when in situations like besieging a city/castle against few (like 30 soldiers).

I will rather fuck up myself than let AI do it for me.

4000 troops vs 150. Is routing that single unit truly worth eating two loading screens when the auto resolve can finish the fight with 0-10 losses?


Edit: Also, for Rome 2 goodness, I am personally enjoying the DeI mod. I find myself NOT playing just because each release they do gets better and better and I want to savor all the goodness. So I just sit around, staring at their patch notes and rereading their forum threads... Probably wont resist any longer and play patch .8 when they add army reforms(though bare bones according to them)

Edit 2: .8 is out!
Title: Re: Rome 2: Opinions/Rating
Post by: JackieChan on March 13, 2014, 09:44:45 pm

edit: oops wrong topic