Expeditions: Rome - the final Expeditions game from Logic Artists

[rusty_shackleford]

The most obvious good choice is Caesarism

have you played the game by chance?

 

[Heroic Liberator]

The most obvious good choice is Caesarism

have you played the game by chance?

Caesarism done by the PC, rusty.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

There can only be so much strategic depth with the game's combat system, so the reliance on tactical gimmicks differing from mission to mission is what keeps the game interesting. Although some of these fights are indeed annoying.

Disagree. They had this gimmicky shit in Conquistador, which had the shittier combat, then E: Viking had very little of it, and had a fun combat system, and in Rome it's way worse.

Their base combat system is fine, compared to most RPGs out there, they just needed to make the encounters against tough enemies instead of this Gymnite/Civilian shit, and let you use the combat system tools instead of jumping through retarded handicap hoops.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Their base combat system is fine, compared to most RPGs out there, they just needed to make the encounters against tough enemies instead of this Gymnite/Civilian shit, and let you use the combat system tools instead of jumping through retarded handicap hoops.

So basically you want linear encounters with bullet sponges as it were. That'd get old fast tbh, although I do agree that the game can feel a bit trashmoby at times with all the extra civilians.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Their base combat system is fine, compared to most RPGs out there, they just needed to make the encounters against tough enemies instead of this Gymnite/Civilian shit, and let you use the combat system tools instead of jumping through retarded handicap hoops.

So basically you want linear encounters with bullet sponges as it were. That'd get old fast tbh, although I do agree that the game can feel a bit trashmoby at times with all the extra civilians.

"win in X turns or you fail" just turns it into a puzzle game.
Albeit not quite as bad as e.g., Druidstone, it's still offputting.

There's a lot of battles you can end in one turn because you just have to kill one person and suddenly everyone else flees no matter what.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

"win in X turns or you fail" just turns it into a puzzle game.
Albeit not quite as bad as e.g., Druidstone, it's still offputting.

There's a lot of battles you can end in one turn because you just have to kill one person and suddenly everyone else flees no matter what.

That makes it a balance issue, not a design one. Having alternatives in how to end a particular encounter increases tactical depth.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

"win in X turns or you fail" just turns it into a puzzle game.
Albeit not quite as bad as e.g., Druidstone, it's still offputting.

There's a lot of battles you can end in one turn because you just have to kill one person and suddenly everyone else flees no matter what.

That makes it a balance issue, not a design one. Having alternatives in how to end a particular encounter increases tactical depth.

Doesn't make it any less dumb.
Does the game automatically end if your player character falls in combat?

 

[Thac0]

Combat feels more like Blackguards where every action in every turn is super weighty than it does Viking and Conquistador. Not crazy about it so far.

Can anyone confirm? Blackguards combat is better than Expeditions combat imo. Although oneshotting units is very feasible in both Vikings and Conquistador.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Does the game automatically end if your player character falls in combat?

Only if you let him bleed out and that's a togglable game rule I think.

But anyhow, it's not dumb. It's just not your type of gameplay (hence your earlier comment about it being 'puzzly'). ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Sunri]

Their base combat system is fine, compared to most RPGs out there, they just needed to make the encounters against tough enemies instead of this Gymnite/Civilian shit, and let you use the combat system tools instead of jumping through retarded handicap hoops.

So basically you want linear encounters with bullet sponges as it were. That'd get old fast tbh, although I do agree that the game can feel a bit trashmoby at times with all the extra civilians.

"win in X turns or you fail" just turns it into a puzzle game.
Albeit not quite as bad as e.g., Druidstone, it's still offputting.

There's a lot of battles you can end in one turn because you just have to kill one person and suddenly everyone else flees no matter what.

After you unlock this skill on veles all battles end in one turn

• Reaper: Every time the character kills an enemy, their Action Point is replenished, all used skills are reset, and movement is fully restored.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

That skill should certainly be nerfed.

 

[notpl]

This whole discussion is stupid since Romans were (and still are) black. Africa begins at the Alps.

 

[jungl]

the fire and water making smoke is nice. The game needs MORE gimicks like pantheon gods giving random boons in fights. super speed or throw a boulder that puts out fires.

 

[Parsimonious cook]

After you unlock this skill on veles all battles end in one turn

• Reaper: Every time the character kills an enemy, their Action Point is replenished, all used skills are reset, and movement is fully restored.

I had the Reaper skill on one of my preatorians, but I dont remember ever using it. I used the Marathon skill (unlimited move until you have to stop) once or twice, but there isnt really need to use these (admitedly OP) skills at all unless you want to. What I used a lot was the "push down" and "warcry" skill (the one that stuns enemies in 2 hex radius) of the Principes. Also the Interrupt skill of archers is p. good, with high level gear you can one shot mooks.

The most obvious good choice is Caesarism, not bowing down to patrician snobs as @Parsimonious cook has done.

Bro I was just fighting for democracy, no bully pls.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Bro I was just fighting for democracy, no bully pls.

Et tu, Parsius? A democracy for honorable men as it were.

 

[Sunri]

That skill should certainly be nerfed.

Combine it with

Born Ready: Grants 30% of max focus at the beginning of combat. Every upgrade adds 30
Sneak Attack: 2-6 Piercing Damage & Generates 1 Focus. Sneak attacks deal +50% damage on your first two turns. Upgrade for 50% more damage
War Horn: Applies Rallied to allies, which gives +25% damage. Upgrade for +1 status effect duration.

And the only enemies that will survive are armored ones, but you will kill all squishes, so they will lose morale anyway I bet you can make even stronger combos, but I wasted a lot of points because I invested in unarmed combat at the beginning damm now I want to replay this trash game only to make some dumb op build

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Yeah, honestly the builds are pretty weak also. The typical Roman build (Principes) has been turned into a tank, with limited DPS and kinda boring themes. Archers are useful but not like Romans were ever known for their archers, and good luck keeping your Veles/Triari alive on harder difficulty settings, with infinite enemy archer range and focus fire.

So basically you want linear encounters with bullet sponges as it were. That'd get old fast tbh, although I do agree that the game can feel a bit trashmoby at times with all the extra civilians.

Not bullet sponges, enemies using the combat system mechanics against you. Since Viking, shields have been the central core mechanic in these games, so if they just threw a bunch of enemies with shields and archers behind them, that would be good enough. Instead of dealing with infinite trashmob waves and all kinds of handicaps.

The combat in this game is kinda like if you spent years training in martial arts, then went to a tournament to fight, and they told you: "well you gotta fight this one-legged gimp, but while you do it, we will tie both of your arms behind your back, put a blindfold on you, and stick a massive dildo up your ass". So it's not so much that this is hard to do, but rather that it's a very strange (and annoying) way to spend your time.

 

[Sensuki]

The fight starts in this fucking village, with your 6 guys being outnumbered by some ridiculous number of enemies, with constant and seemingly infinite reinforcements, and fucking enemy archers sitting inside some houses on hilltops, with full view of your troops. So no tanks to shield the squishies, overwhelming enemies, and your troops completely exposed to enemy missiles.

I don't mind hard fights, but the way this fight is so obviously contrived to fuck you over and make you jump through hoops just kills all the fun. And it's just one example, almost every combat in the game so far is like this.

That was the first pacification mission from memory. I think I took Syneros, 1 x Princeps, 1 x Triarius, 1 x Veles and 2 x Sagg, I went to the left at the start and worked my way around the map. I think one guy went down and I had to stabilize him but otherwise it was alright once you got out of the starting area where you get sandwiched. I found that one fun, YMMV.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

I am not saying these are not winnable, I am just saying they are not fun. The fight against Archeus was exactly like this. Overwhelming odds (of trashmobs), the catch (he had so much armor you couldn't do damage to him unless you shred the armor first), the catch #2 (you had very limited means to shred it at that time, and he couldn't be locked down with most builds, and could just run around ignoring attacks of opportunity and take out your backline), so eventually you had to resort to the cheap way the developers intended (bring enemy number down to 5). So it's like instead of focusing on fun combat, you are playing the game of "guess how the developers wanted you to tackle this shit".

 

[notpl]

I rushed that guy and killed him in 2 or 3 turns on Hard. His sword sounds good at first but is pretty mediocre compared to most other legendaries.

 

[notpl]

IIRC there's literally a pile of javelins right next to him. And you have friendlies on the map, it's overall one of the easier fights in act 1 whichever way you decide to do it.

 

[Oropay]

Haven't bothered more than skimming a few replies in the thread, but on the default difficulty settings for Hard, the game is extremely easy. My soldiers are barely even damaged, let alone incapacitated. Also I've seen a few people throwing around the word 'puzzle' to refer to the combat encounters in the game, but that could not be farther from reality. The player has a wide variety of methods at his disposal, such different ways to kill particular a enemy or tactical approaches to complete objectives.

I submit that many people are not fully utilizing all the tools that the game offers the player, or simply just bad.

 

[notpl]

Haven't bothered more than skimming a few replies in the thread, but on the default difficulty settings for Hard, the game is extremely easy. My soldiers are barely even damaged, let alone incapacitated. Also I've seen a few people throwing around the word 'puzzle' to refer to the combat encounters in the game, but that could not be farther from reality. The player has a wide variety of methods at his disposal, such different ways to kill particular a enemy or tactical approaches to complete objectives.

I submit that many people are not fully utilizing all the tools that the game offers the player, or simply just bad.

Considering most of us in the thread gave up on the game because it was insultingly easy on Hard, I'm gonna go with "just bad." Saying "you have very few ways to shred the enemy's armor" about a mission where they literally positioned the boss next to a barrel of armor-shredding weapons says everything you need to know about the speaker.

 

[Bastardchops]

I am not going to watch some 16 minute of some dork on youtube talking about American culture wars.

However here is a TL;DR for you: There were black slaves, freedmen (I.E liberalis like the static one in the game), mercenaries and raised auxiliaries in Rome. Black citizens were rare until Caracalla.

The video is focused on the history not on the culture wars. But if you want to be willfully ignorant that's fine you'll just become progressively more retarded.

 

[Bastardchops]

Yeah shouldn't have responded to someone learning their "history" from 16 minute youtube videos. "History" in this case of course being whether or not an ancient states had black people in it, which is what these "Rome fans" often learn as history, just collection of anecdotes.

Nice job shifting the goalposts there. See you're defending the game including black people as Roman nobles, whilst retreating to the claim that the Roman empire had black people in it.