Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Rome Total War II

Spectacle

Arcane
Patron
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
8,363
I'm having huge amounts of money pile up every month since I can't build any more advanced buildings without running out of either food or public order.

I'm conquering the neighbouring barbarians so I can turn their land into food factories, so that I can repurpose farms to temples in my core regions so I can support more high level buildings without public order getting murdered by the squalor penalty.

I suppose it could be a clever mechanic by CA to drive Roman expansion to feed the hungry masses in Rome, but it's probaly just poorly thought out design.

Slavery is now a thing of the past. I have no need for the extra money so slaves do nothing but cause trouble.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,507
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I am a veteran of the Total Wars. In my time as a commander in Napoleonic France and feudal Japan I have seen men and empires and tree models alike wink out of existence. For all the cruel acts I have observed and contributed to, nothing compares to the horrors I have encountered in Rome.

It sounded like a vacation, a fine place to line men up and order them to run into other lines of men clutching pointy bits of metal. It is not. I feel as though reality itself is crumbling around me.

When I survey the battlefield all before me is blurry. Faces are crude and inhuman. Armor and weaponry are oddly angular, as if constructed from sheets of folded paper. Even the rolling hills and the forests that surround us exhibit a lack of detail that is almost menacing, as if nature has given up on this cursed land.

totalwar2.jpg


Worse yet, all motion is stuttered and choppy. When the men march I get the sensation that I'm only witnessing half of their movements. It turns my stomach. My assistant offers to smear the lens of my looking glass, claiming that motion will appear more natural if I have fewer details to observe. His efforts only succeed in making everything look worse, which is a remarkable achievement.

As I go over the candidates to lead my newly created army, it occurs to me that everyone looks the same. Well, that's not fair. Some of these guys look like they started with the exact same face as everyone else, which is then pressed through a waffle grinder. Do you not have waffle grinders where you come from? I will gladly trade my freshly ground waffles for a world that isn't inhabited by creepy identical men.

Part of my job deals with diplomacy. I reach out to a friendly neighbor and seek an agreement to build a mutually beneficial trade route. They refuse to sign on unless I pay them 5,000 gold. If built, the route will provide each of us with 50 gold every year. I... have to think about this one. Do the people in this land understand what a year is? Or negotiation?

There is an important battle. I carefully position my troops to take full advantage of the terrain. As the enemy reveals their first moves, I make minor adjustments to my own plan. This is a clash between two strategic minds, to be waged and won with the lives of others. This is the distillation of human ingenuity and brutality. A gigantic flag appears way off in the woods for no good reason. We are told that if someone parks under this flag for a few seconds they will win the battle. Both sides throw strategy to the wind and run toward the flag as fast as they can.

Let's say a magic flag doesn't appear. The moment contact is made with the enemy, the battle turns into crowds of dudes slowly bumping into one another and yelling. Occasionally someone remembers to stab or parry. You know, the things people do when they fight. Only the first few rows of soldiers bother to grab a partner, while everyone else seems happy to stand still. I have seen the chaos of a frenzied melee. This is nothing like it. Here in Rome, the battles resemble two clumps of algae slowly meeting in a pond and settling against one another for five minutes, with one clump suddenly losing morale and running away.

I come across an ally on the road to our next conquest. He waves at me in a friendly manner and I wave back. When I attempt to take my army around him, this simple act proves an impossibility. One man has somehow blockaded a major road and prevented thousands of troops from advancing. He isn't trying to block us, of course. In fact, he seems as dumbfounded as we are. Is this a cursed road? Has there been some breakdown in the fundamental laws of nature? When I think upon the matter it sends a shiver up my spine.

One of our spies is a woman. When she steps onto a boat she delivers an overly sultry "Hello boys", projecting her words at a volume sufficient to make the entire army uncomfortable. When she disembarks the first words out of her mouth are (and I am not making either of these quotes up) "Sailors have such rough hands." All of us feel intimidated and more than a little weirded out by her boorish behavior. Is this how all women are? We don't know because this is the only female any of us have ever encountered.

Even the enemy acts in unusual ways. My men stand at the ready as the opposition rushes towards them. At the last moment the enemies turn on their heels, zooming back the way they came at top speed. After a few seconds they turn yet again to charge, repeating the process indefinitely. If the enemy is attempting to play mind games with my troops they might want to reconsider their strategy, as my archers are raining a torrent of projectiles down on their heads throughout this senseless maneuver. I have won several battles by standing still and allowing the enemy to sprint itself to death. I will do it as many times as necessary, but I will take no pleasure in it.

Like many of the horrors I have encountered in Rome, the madness of my enemy leads me to believe that this half-made world was not ready to be visited by humans.
 

Trash

Pointing and laughing.
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
29,683
Location
About 8 meters beneath sea level.
The victory flag in open battles is comletely retarded,who did this should be shot int he balls, it force you to place your troops in horrible strategic locations . In strategy games i used to place archers in woods , hide units for ambushes , place cavalry in top of the the hill and charge that kind of tactical stuff you know . Nothing of that anymore, defend the fucking flag at the bottom of the valley
I had about 50 battles thus far (excluding the ones I autoresolved) and never I saw a single victory point in anything but town / fortress maps. So I'm not sure what you are talking about.
All that you've named above I (and even AI at times) do without any issues.
That's true though, playing some more battles, it seems that only city defence/attack maps have those, and in those cases you station in the city anyway.

Very rarely you get a defensive battle in which a victory point plays a role. Happened to me twice and I believe one of the first gameplay vids out there also showed it. It's pretty retarded as in all other aspects it is a regular battle, only with a VP in one point of the map.

ships you sink in a naval battle are not neccessarily the ships that are gone in the campaign.

I destroyed Epirus as Macedon, and they had an admiral's Hexareme that I, no joke, sank 5! times before it eventually decided to disappear off the campaign map.

One time I even cracked it in half with a ram attack, just to be informed I had taken 7 captives and the ship leisurely retreated off the coast of Apollonia.

Yeah, happened to me as well. Enemy flagship kept turning up battle after battle, no matter how often I sank it. Rage inducing.

Anyway, I'm done with the game for the moment. Will come back in a month or so to see how it shapes up.
 

Notorious

Augur
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
277
I played for 4 turns. In the 1st I declared war on Sparta, Macedonia joined them. I completely crushed Sparta's armies by doing something that is possible in all TW games. Build a larger line than your enemy and then flank him. Great... At the end of turn 1 I besieged Sparta. The AI had an 2nd army further into the Peloponnese and it intelligently attacked me with it and I had to retreat. Good. So on the 2nd turn I rebuild my army.

On turn 3 I once again attacked Sparta but there was no spartan army to be seen. I decided to assault the city (Since most famously Sparta didn't have a wall which is also true in this game.) I attacked from 2 sides through 3 streets. The AI only defended 2 and I reached the victory point without a fight. In older games the AI would now instantly pull back it's entire army. Instead it attacked my troops in the other two streets. I won with 70 men lost.

Now I found out where Spartas armies did go

yKfeirD.jpg


Why are they there? I don't know... Even in ETW they would be standing in their capital and ONLY city...

With one army the AI attacked Sparta a complete joke. The second marched around.

On turn 4 I got a mission to defeat the second spartan army because it endangered Athens... free 500 gold for me....

This game is broken and I don't think they can ever repair it. Not even dedicated modders will be able to make this work. What a sad joke this is.
 

Malakal

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
10,288
Location
Poland
AI movement is seriously erratic but I have seen several nations blob. Including Sparta, Seleucids, those egyptian guys that arent Egypt, Budici.
 

Mortmal

Arcane
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
9,186
Still, the UI is so bland and uninspired that it's very easy to miss things. Especially if you make it that minimalist that one has to go pixel hunting for tiny little icons in a bland transparent window ripped straight from Windows 7...

Its not big deal i can finish the campaign in hard without even using it.. That if i had the courage to wait 4-5 min each turns , there's no challenge at all i could autresolve with my big army to the end , no surprise no backstab no one to declare war.


Disregard everything sun tzu said in his little book, it seems the purpose of the game is to be played with a pad for mainstream audience, we are just beta testing for the upcoming ps3 xbox one port.
Yes the interface is very gamepad friendly and consoles will totally run this game.

Paranoid much?

.

Paranoia is healthy:
http://www.vg247.com/2013/03/05/tot...s4-an-adapted-pc-proves-pc-gaming-isnt-dying/

"When asked if PS4 could be the first console to see a Total War game released on it, Starr said it’s “always something that’s being considered and it’s a possibility,” but beyond that he had no comment."

Exactly like it was for diablo 3, another big disapointment.
 

J_C

One Bit Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
16,947
Location
Pannonia
Project: Eternity Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
LoL some codexers failing hard to find simple info,then criticize the game for not having good UI.:salute:

Ok, this UI is getting on my nerves. Maybe I'm stupid, yeah, I'm probably stupid. But I cannot find the menu where I can see my resources. I've just established a trade route with the greeks, and the game tells me that I'm selling 65 marbles to them. Cool. But where can I see that what resources do I have, where is that 65 marbles coming from.

The other thing is the buildings. Figuring out what buildings you have currently is a mess. As I see it, you can only see what you have built last, and what you can build in the future. But where are my already built buildings? For example in one region I can only build Legionaries and throwing spear dudes but in the other, I can also build Triariis. And for the hell I can't figure out that which building makes that difference. Am I blind, or this awful UI really unusable?

Just uninstall.

lzldrGM.jpg



iOddlnj.jpg



You arent the only one,i dont know where its located either, worse i had to browse the web to find how to use edicts,since theres no manual , those are so old gen, but an online encyclopedia. Of course the info wasnt in.
I wanted to go to next turn then received the "you can have a new edict" message , but couldnt find where this was located, completely unintuitive . Same for buildings, uninformative symbols instead of a clear pic of a building like in previous games. its a simple game much simpler game than paradox games yet i find it more confusing, the UI is a nightmare . A simple exemple why placing the strategic map button right next to the end turn half the time i open the map when wanting to end turn, this button doesnt even have a map icon on it...

Now that i think about it am not even sure if building in one province allows recruitement of said units in all owned provinces.

You too.
Thanks for the clear up, I missed those. :oops: But I'm not happy with this. Ok, the first picture shows which resources you own, but it doesnt say how many. The second one says how many, but as I see it, it doesn't show it summerized. So if I want to know how many marble I have altogether, I have to find every icon on the map and summerize them myself. And this is shit, if you have dozens of marble icons on a map. I take this back if there is a summerized data of the resource, but I'm not seeing it.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,705
Can we have transport ships than needs to be build, and trade as a real neighbour trade, where stuff propagates through provinces?
 

Malakal

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
10,288
Location
Poland
Can we have transport ships than needs to be build, and trade as a real neighbour trade, where stuff propagates through provinces?

Oh come on, who the fuck would want that. There are ships and carts on the map moving and there are trade routes you can raid its enough, this game is not Patrician V its Total War. Trade is good combat sucks thats the issue.

Also what bothers me is there doesnt seem to be any internal trade. So you may have hundreds of units of wine but no one will buy it if you dont have trade agreements. Ridiculous to think its just getting thrown away.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Very rarely you get a defensive battle in which a victory point plays a role. Happened to me twice and I believe one of the first gameplay vids out there also showed it. It's pretty retarded as in all other aspects it is a regular battle, only with a VP in one point of the map.

After playing some more it seems like VPs probably were added to city maps for multiplayer as the absolute majority (9/10) of city battles are getting finished for me before I even get the chance to cap or even reach most of the VPs.
I think adding them is really done so you won't kite enemy player/AI with horseback archers on a siege sometimes even winning the battle despite enemy taking your castle. Like artificially extending time till reinforcements arrive.
I mean I did exactly that in some battles in MTW2.

Out of all battles I had thus far (which is 50+ now) only one I've won by holding a VP (after crushing the defenders and that happened not at a VP location) before naval reinforcement arrived. But it kinda makes sense, city was mine.


Granted AI needs work. But it's not as retarded as in Rome 1. AI takes good spots really often and often tries cavalry flanking, something I do too. Yeah on a global map AI is not very good but it doesn't do things that would induce facepalms.

Also after this time I think MTW2 got much better sieges. It's not Rome 2's fault really as a game, just that epic multilayered castles and cannons weren't the thing in ancient Rome & neighborhood.
I wish they won't go back from improvements they did (really good slot based region management, region dependent recruitment, lesser nations, limited amount of armies*) and will put them into Medieval 3 as overall it's just has a more interesting era.

*before you rage - remember how you had to chase and squish every micro army in Medieval 2? Besides it doesn't make much sense having an army without a general.
 

Declinator

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
542
Granted AI needs work. But it's not as retarded as in Rome 1. AI takes good spots really often and often tries cavalry flanking, something I do too. Yeah on a global map AI is not very good but it doesn't do things that would induce facepalms.

Also after this time I think MTW2 got much better sieges. It's not Rome 2's fault really as a game, just that epic multilayered castles and cannons weren't the thing in ancient Rome & neighborhood.
I wish they won't go back from improvements they did (really good slot based region management, region dependent recruitment, lesser nations, limited amount of armies*) and will put them into Medieval 3 as overall it's just has a more interesting era.

*before you rage - remember how you had to chase and squish every micro army in Medieval 2? Besides it doesn't make much sense having an army without a general.

The battle AI in Rome 2 is worse than Rome 1. Open field it may be (slightly) better than Rome 1 but inside settlements it is worse and quite frankly it is ridiculous that they could possibly make it even worse. It was sort of okay in Shogun 2/MTW2 and at least interesting without archers in Rome 1 but here it is hopeless.

This sort of victories were simply not possible before:

0LKXJJX.jpg


With autoresolve it gave me 0 percent possibility of victory or close to that. Now a part of it is that the roman troops are just hilariously over-powered but things like the enemy coming close and then quickly running back, javelinmen only sometimes escaping if you rush them with your heavy infantry, enemy being completely disorganized and sending units basically one-by-one...hopeless. This is certainly not the only victory like this. Maybe auto-resolve calculations should be corrected to reflect how bad the AI is if they cannot correct the AI itself as these kinds of battles are tedious.

The AI is also just as hopeless attacking settlements. One time when I was defending a walled city and the AI just sent three units close to the gates and just sat there. I shot them to death and they sent another three. Rinse and repeat until I was out of javelins and the enemy was almost out of troops.

The campaign AI seems hit and miss. It is very bad at taking care of its own cities and basically never keeps an army inside a settlement, seemingly preferring the perpetual rebellions better. Sometimes it also starves its own armies to near death just outside its settlements. On the other hand the factions do always seem to have a couple of stacks and I have yet to see a ballista stack or something like that. The stacks rarely have any elite units but still. They are also seemingly very slow at expanding as I have yet to see my ally Egypt take anything (in more than 100 turns.)

I preferred the faction remnants becoming rebel armies and just basically doing nothing in MTW2 to these kamikaze faction remnants that magically survive even when they attack 2000 men with 6.

I think the town size limiting what you can build was a much better system than this technology/barracks thing. You know that when you have praetorians in like turn 20 you are in for some steamrolling.
Restricting how many buildings you can build is less interesting here than it was in Shogun 2 as in Rome 2 you can only need to build barracks once inside one province for example as you can then recruit the units in the whole province.
The province system itself is also frustrating as it effectively stops you from blitzing multiple cities because they have a combined unhappiness factor. Feels ridiculous waiting out to have that temple so that you can move on and capture the next city.
I liked being able to quickly sort out what I need to build on the other hand and having the provinces only for that would be okay but the unhappiness should be separate. What's with not being able to set separate levels of taxation anyway? This was in Shogun 2 too if I remember correctly but seems just pointless simplification.

The general system feels very constricting and annoying as you can't so easily garrison cities or attack several smaller armies/settlements but I like the armies having an "identity" even though the cumulative effects of the bonuses do become a bit too much towards the end.

The civil war in Rome 2 is also pathetic compared to Rome 1. They acquired one city from me and had some 5 or 6 non-full stacks or assorted legionnaries/levites/equites and then just spread out and invaded everything that they saw. After eradicating the stacks it was just a normal faction.

The only real bright spot I've seen in the game is the auxiliary barracks system which is interesting even if you can just build the basic barracks anyway. It was kind of disappointing to not be able to recruit auxiliary elephants from Carthage though.
 

Tigranes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
10,350
I'll just say Rome 1 also had those problems, e.g. give me a bridge and I can give you those numbers on that screenshot any day. And not quite as dramatic but 2v1 3v1 numbers were very possible if you had walls, or if the AI on open field went bonkers and ran around in circles (happening fairly frequently), etc. I suppose that this time they don't quite have enough new jingles or promises of finally fixed stuff to lure me in to waste my time and money on what has been a broken franchise for over half a decade.

Don't get me wrong, Shogun 2 was an improvement, but it certainly was still a broken game of broken AI at heart that was doing its best to cover up its embarrassing bits (and did pretty well at that).
 

Declinator

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
542
I'll just say Rome 1 also had those problems, e.g. give me a bridge and I can give you those numbers on that screenshot any day. And not quite as dramatic but 2v1 3v1 numbers were very possible if you had walls, or if the AI on open field went bonkers and ran around in circles (happening fairly frequently), etc. I suppose that this time they don't quite have enough new jingles or promises of finally fixed stuff to lure me in to waste my time and money on what has been a broken franchise for over half a decade.

Don't get me wrong, Shogun 2 was an improvement, but it certainly was still a broken game of broken AI at heart that was doing its best to cover up its embarrassing bits (and did pretty well at that).

The problem is that there were no special circumstances in that battle. It was me attacking and a basic settlement with nothing special going on or the AI bugging out more than it does every time.

I never played any other TW games "fresh" / non-patched but their latest versions are all better (well Rome 1 and later) than this version of Rome 2 battle AI wise.
 

Heresiarch

Prophet
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
1,451
CA released a broken game with broken AI trololol

Trolling aside, I hate myself having registered Steam in an European country, 53 euros for this beta is just way too expensive. TPB demoing it seems reasonable but I don't want to play catch up with their promised constant patches.
 

Trash

Pointing and laughing.
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
29,683
Location
About 8 meters beneath sea level.
Love the comparisons with the Rome 1 AI. That one was utterly retarded and gets trumped in almost every department by this one, and rightly so. Notable and possible critical exception being siege battles. The AI there derps out so heavily that it either goes tarded or even immobile. It seems like it's not even there at times. Amazing when you consider the improvements made in CAI and general BAI. Personally I suspect they just didn't finish it before release.

My temporary conclusion about Rome 2; this is a beta at best. Promising yet so flawed it could go either way with a few more months of dev time. Unfortunately they released it as is. Worst release since Empire and that one is still a mess, years later. Will they manage to turn it around with a few months of patching and perhaps a sizeable expansion? I'm not so sure. The core game has stuff that certainly could improve on the whole TW formula but there are so many design decisions that reek that I'm honestly not sure if the CA of today can make a good game out of it.

EDIT: Not really getting across what I want to say. I feel Rome 2 has some merit, has a lot of mechanics that are a mayor step backwards and is released in a terribly shoddy manner. It may turn out good with a solid bout of patching and soul searching from CA. I'm just not very confident this will happen.

i must say seeing rocks and arrows bounce off shields and helmets is a neat bit of graphic-whore mongering i can appreciate.

I love soldiers slamming cavalery of horses and officers bellowing at their troops. Rome 2 really has loads of these little touches that make the game feel so much more alive. That they got these details right but fuck up the bigger picture is baffling.
 

Tigranes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
10,350
I'll just say Rome 1 also had those problems, e.g. give me a bridge and I can give you those numbers on that screenshot any day. And not quite as dramatic but 2v1 3v1 numbers were very possible if you had walls, or if the AI on open field went bonkers and ran around in circles (happening fairly frequently), etc. I suppose that this time they don't quite have enough new jingles or promises of finally fixed stuff to lure me in to waste my time and money on what has been a broken franchise for over half a decade.

Don't get me wrong, Shogun 2 was an improvement, but it certainly was still a broken game of broken AI at heart that was doing its best to cover up its embarrassing bits (and did pretty well at that).

The problem is that there were no special circumstances in that battle. It was me attacking and a basic settlement with nothing special going on or the AI bugging out more than it does every time.

I never played any other TW games "fresh" / non-patched but their latest versions are all better (well Rome 1 and later) than this version of Rome 2 battle AI wise.

Well, that's why then. I can't say for STW1/MTW1 as I wasn't around for launch, but every 3D TW at launch has had that, pretty much, with the exception of Shogun 2 IIRC.
 

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,396
I think the problem of the siege AI is that the AI is set to not get far from the settlement and as there are alot of settlements without walls, you get this schizophrenic behaviour of the AI charging you and at the last minute retreating. They could had hid this retarded behavior by using rome tactic of making even small settlements having basic walls.The AI charge you until it reaches the limit of the area they can go then return to defend the city. I think this was done for you not being able to lure the AI out of the city but they exposing their backs to your archers is just retarded. They could fix this if they find a way to make the AI stand their ground and don't charge on siege battles. From my experience, the CAI is even a little better than Rome 1 but feels like a degrade from Shogun 2.
 

oldmanpaco

Master of Siestas
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
13,609
Location
Winter
So its been 7 years and EB2 is still not out. Rome 2 is not gonna be good for a while.

Also this was the first day 1 game I've purchased since M2:TW. Dammit.

edit: I think we sometimes begin to confuse the mods with the releases. Rome 1 sucked. Rome 1 with EB is just about the most fun I've had in a strategy game.
 
Last edited:
Unwanted

Cursed Platypus

Unwanted
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
321
Location
Please contact an administrator
I heard they wanna make Empire 2 next.

Clearly, CA are not learning animals. And what's up with that Warhammer game?

No they don't?
If anything, something medieval would be the most popular choice, With a potential Medieval fantasy Warhammer Total War a very likely candidate.

Ideally we have a game that takes place in the 13th century, 4 turn per year, excellent siege mechanism (possibly fully revamped to fit the period better), Crusader-King-Lite political systhem and nice Gothic styled UI.
And then expansions for the crusades (northern and eastern), the Viking invasions, The hundred years war.

Or a Dynasty Total War with the possibility to play as the mongol horde.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom