Development Info Rome II campaign map gets explained

[Trash]

Tags: The Creative Assembly; Total War: Rome II

Modder turned Creative Assembly dev Jack Lusted finally gave us some solid information on how provinces and armies will work in Rome II. They seem to have tried to limit the endless siege grind of earlier Total War games and have also reduced the number of armies that can run around the map at any time. Plus, remember how the map in Shogun 2 basically funnelled factions along specific paths?

We’ve made the change that not all settlements provide siege battles due to the sheer number of regions, as we don’t want the game turning into a siege fest. Even in Shogun 2, with its geography that is very good at making battles happen away from settlements, the majority of battles were sieges. With the more open geography of Europe we wanted to make sure that players don’t end up fighting endless siege battles. We also want the siege battles you do fight to be bigger and better than ever before, so making them less frequent but more interesting helps make that happen.​

Incline? Well, then there is this.

 

[Spectacle]

Less sieges is definitley incline, those have been the scourge of the Total War games since Medieval 1.

 

[Trash]

Sieges could be fantastic with adequate siege mechanics. Seems like they not only toned them down but also did a lot of work on making sure the ones remaining would be more fun. Multiple capture points alone is a massive incline from the old city square of yore.

Plus I really like the idea of having the numbers of armies tied to the strength of a faction. It should really make you invested in your stacks and would making losing one a huge setback. I like that. Earlier reports that for the Romans at least the various legions would also differ based on wether being based on the northern frontier or in the deserts of Africa also sounds very good. Got high hopes for this one.

Now, here's to hoping they included a QA department and at least one AI programmer this time.

 

[Whisky]

Less sieges eh? Well, that could work out. In Total War games, often I'd go entire games without fighting a single non-siege battle. Now if only they'd make defensive battles more common...very rarely do I ever fight on the defensive in Total War games.

 

[~RAGING BONER~]

I really like the sound of developing military traditions when it comes to your different armies...sounds like it offers a lot more versatility and strategic value to your troop deployment.

 

[Space Satan]

So far, Total war always suffered from turtling. It's what made multiplayer games a horrible and torturous grind. Because there were no attacker-defender designation and players just sit on their asses and wait until one of them become bored and charge.
And from past experiences with Shogun 2 Creative Assembly had 1000000 monkeys doing siege balance.

 

[Spectacle]

One thing that would be really cool would be some actual siege mechanics and not just assault mechanics. For each turn a fortress is under siege you should be able to plan where to construct trenches, circumvallation, dig tunnels and try to sap the wall and concentrate artillery fire against particular points. Then the next turn you'd see the result of your actions and you'd decide if it's time to assault or to continue the siege for another turn.

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

To be frank, sieges weren't that common in antiquity. At least not as common as in the Empire TW Era, where 80% of the battles were sieges and strategy was aimed at hitting an enemy's logistical base and having him starve to death.

But I like how it went with the siege objectives. Larger city maps would make for some interesting battles.

 

[oscar]

Shogun 2 seemed to have largely given up on traditional 'sieges' altogether with settlements acting more as good defensive terrain and cover than actual fortresses. While that was part of the nature of Japanese castle design, which were more about advantaging the siege defender in the inevitable assault than actually keeping enemies out for years if need be, it would also seem to make sense in the Classical world.

 

[Space Satan]

Total War sieges were fucked up mostly due to retarded AI coupled with idiotic system of breaching fortifications. The only way to breach the wall was to bombard it.Which is basically you wasting 10 minutes waiting inaccurate artillery pound fortifications to make a single breach. The only difference was assault towers and sap mines in Med2. But still it doesn't help much.