Impressions of the game [v.2] (Total War: Rome 2)

How do you like the new factions of pirates and robbers, as for me the Thracians were greatly deprived of units and Illyria too, but the Getae turned out well

Of course, it's strange that the faction that got it for free is better developed than the paid ones.

dushadushadusha creatives
are trawling us (

dushadushadusha
This is fair)) I think the developers will also add free fractions from each civilization, at least one, we still have, uh, I don’t even know what to call them, in general, nomadic tribes of blacks)) like Numidians, etc., and of the eastern factions we have only one pure in principle - the Parthia, I'm also not sure, but perhaps semi-barbarian civilizations also represent a special type of civilizations, in the General we are waiting for more fractions, including free ones)
By the way, I've never played for a long time for barbarian factions, so I did not reach the confederation tribes, tell me if I, for example, the Thracians created a confederation with the Getae, I will have their units?

NTrojan
Unfortunately not.

The game is just the bottom, despite the fact that I really love total war, but it goes beyond any limits.
Just a fucking unoptimized bottom. How many beautiful trailers were shown, but in fact, diarrhea, as usually happens ... In general, into the furnace

Did
you run repack version 1.2 on your grandmother's calculator? : Z

The Most Original Nick
Unreasonable hating. Just for today, with all the patches, the game is not that good, it is the best in the series. The optimization is very good. Goes on any buckets. On my old system, it flies in extreme, everything is twisted to the maximum.
The mechanics of the game were tweaked, the bugs were tweaked (The only thing left is the sparse loss of the interface and the inoperability of some interface buttons). All DLS are good, especially blood, and the battle of alesia is the best, my beloved Scythians have been returned. Especially the AI ​​was tweaked, it is now quite smart, although of course if you need a worthy opponent, then you need to go to a network game.
In one of the patches, the seasons were added for free! Plus, there are tons of good mods in the workshop!

Sir.Rumata
maybe he meant that the developers showed huge cities that gave way to small villages that we see in battle, more beautiful graphics in trailers and other minor bugs))
I'm going to buy a license, tell me how the network game works in campaign mode , with the battle, of course, everything is clear, but I understand that they also added the ability to play over the network on a strategic map with the development of cities, etc.?

NTrojan is
generally called a cooperative and it is in the series, if insanity does not change me, since Medival 2

Alexator
As far as I understood before 2 Rome, it was only possible to play battles on the network, but not a strategic kurta

NTrojan,
in my opinion, is in the strategic already in additions to Medival 2, I saw .... but I don’t remember exactly.

DROGBA
Who made you buy? Don't buy if you think 1000 is too much per game in this state. By purchasing, you agree that the current version of the game costs so much, and then there is nothing to complain about. In addition, there is always a torrent option.

dushadushadusha
I pre-ordered, none of the developers said that the game was not even half done, so, in view of the fact that a fan of the series, hoped like a fool on the conscientiousness of creatives, and it turned out sideways, but I won’t take such a scam anymore, just torrent

Partner001 I
fully support ... for expressing the same assessments I was mercilessly doused with slop on imtw.ru
In general, I want to say that the smartest decision on the part of the SA would not be to reinvent the bicycle, but to take old Rome and with successful solutions from Shogun, Mediaval and Empire and simply port it all to a new graphic engine, i.e. restart Rome. It would be a masterpiece. And so ... in two days I try to start playing 5 times and every time in a stupor. There is a persistent feeling that here, as in the Empire, a certain global AI is trying to put a spoke in the wheel of the player at any cost. whatever - but if only shit ... a bigger player. Strange scripted events (such as an epidemic in an army that plunged into ships, a sharp declaration of war all at once, etc.), well, not related to game events, idiocy with unrest from buildings that should put things in order, and a lot of things ... that a bunch of Slavic tribes were recorded as Germanic - generally tin.
The only thing that made me happy was that the SA finally opened a history textbook and somehow figured out who lived in the Black Sea and Caspian regions. Pleased with the presence Massagetae-Saks (now Kazakhs), Georgians, Armenians, Celtic tribes such as fights (preserved in the Czech ethnic group), the Thracians (ethnogenesis-Galician Ukrainians) ....
Post Prics'a the pros
and strategic game could play online until the second Rome

ME2 Omega
"the smartest decision on the part of the CA would not be to reinvent the bicycle, but to take the old Rome and with successful solutions from the Shogun, Mediaval and the Empire and just port it all to a new graphic engine, ie restart Rome"
What they own and done.

Alexator
You read my thoughts))) I also wanted to express myself in the spirit that the author of "ME2 Omega" contradicts himself ....

CONS:

1. Dull picture of units in the old style. Nothing is clear, I only distinguish cavalry and infantry) It is easy to confuse legionnaires and hastats.
2. Construction ... still didn't understand anything! In Rome, the first had a lot more options.
3. Garrison ... when besieging a settlement, it turns out that there are not 300 people (as shown), but 1000 reinforcements.
4. Cities, I thought there would be a lot of them, and no more, no less! Maybe there will be a map for Rome 2, like Mundus Magnus for Rome 1.
5. Troops of the same type ... all barbarian states have the same troops, the Greeks too, the east too. etc., the troops on a campaign differ only in cultures
6. Armies ... to send an army, you must definitely hire a commander, and if I want to transport 2 detachments from city to city ...
7. Battles, no scale, epic, etc. ... Even if you set 10 thousand to 10 thousand, a minor skirmish will occur and the enemies will run away ... (

Pros:

1. The graphics have become better (well, this is obvious), there will be ice on a powerful computer)))
2. Many states, there are more than 100 of them, now I will not see these stupid gray rebellious lands)
3. The names of the cities, although this is not a big plus)) But the names are believable and real)
4. Diplomacy is 10 times better than in the first, states abide by treaties, you can even make a vassal, they even demand to fall on other states in exchange for money, this is a big plus.
5. The map is large and embossed, it looks very nice, though sometimes the unusual fog of war enrages.
6. The AI ​​intelligence level on the strategic map has increased, plus)

CONCLUSION: The game is, of course, 30-40% raw, but the graph and intellect have made a big step. The rest is a matter of time, over time everything will be fixed with new patches. These are little things ...

really this game reigralnost little, well, just nothing really new happens no matter which country to play the same type, and there is no random events ..... 1 times in all and played all 95% of the game and saw nothing new neubdet

for this game you need advanced diplomacy, for example, there is an opportunity to secretly negotiate an attack with someone on some country, and to diversify the gameplay, but here we can say that apart from fights with the displays of each unit, there is nothing ...

yes, the graphics were improved only by WHAT it is you need it if besides graphics you don't have a fig ...

I understand, with a great delay, but still I want to express my first impressions about the adequacy of the model of warfare proposed by the developers from Creative Assembley in RTV2. I will not be unfounded - I will give specific examples.

Example 1.
There is a siege of the city. Two Roman legions stand in close proximity to each other. Despite this, when the enemy attacks the 1st legion, directly leading the siege, the 2nd does not come to his aid. The reason is the activity of enemy agents. A year later, history repeats itself. And this time, I generally moved the II legion close to the first.
So, how to explain this situation from the standpoint of common sense and historical realities? Well, probably, we are talking about the disruption of communications between the two armies, i.e. about the banal interception of messengers. I wonder how often this happened to armies in close proximity to each other? Offhand examples do not come to mind. In addition, in the second case, the legions generally stood close to each other, which can be interpreted as being within the line of sight, and here any spies will be completely powerless.
I’m already silent about the fact that in both of the above cases, the I-Legion stably before the attack the same spies incapacitated the commander - in general, in military-historical practice, the case is extremely rare.

Example 2.
Take as an example the same siege (it was conducted, for that matter, against Vesontio, the main city of the Sequans). The II Legion literally lost 40% of its strength in just three moves, without engaging in battles and without combat losses. The reason for this reduction in numbers is again the actions of enemy agents. I repeat, 40% in three moves. The question arises, why are battles needed at all? Again, the historical parallels are surprising: if a handful of people were able to reduce by half, or even more, entire armies, then why the hell was it in general to fight? Pronounced delirium. But it is clear that this is far from the limit.

Example 3.
The army leads the siege of Mediolan. Noticing the movement of many superior enemy forces to the north in the alpine passes, it was decided to retreat. It is clear that any sane military leader will retreat in the direction of his strategic rear, where important cities and supply bases are located. However, automatically after lifting the siege, my army safely retreats to the northwest into the dense forests. And this despite the fact that the path to the south is completely clear and absolutely not blocked by anyone! As a result, not only is my legion blocking here with the same superior forces, but also the enemy troops pass completely unhindered to Genoa and safely take it, destroying the weak garrison.
The question is: what are these historical realities and why on the machine, according to some wonderful algorithm laid down by the developers, my commander behaves like a stupid whore or an enemy's accomplice? Who is to blame for this - me, my virtual protégé, or is it the impenetrable stupidity (no, you can't say that, but "an extremely original vision of this situation") of our friends from Creative Essembley?

Example 4.
My army is in Patavia. An army of barbarians approaches the city from Mediolan. However, as a result of the actions of the spy, my legion and all the soldiers in it are paralyzed and all my attempts to give the order to attack are impossible. Laughing at the poor, the barbarians calmly attack the defenseless Arimini in my rear with the next move. Such examples with the paralysis of an entire army from the actions of just one agent - the sea. It is impossible to move normally, to retreat normally - nothing is allowed. So I again ask for examples, what are these handfuls of people who were able to delay the movement of an entire army for many months? This is when it was ?? Or maybe I read something wrong at one time on the military history of the Ancient World? Suggest what you need, guys from Creatives, please.

In general, with the agents, in my opinion, they clearly overdid it. On the other hand, of course, the developers can be understood - the number of armies has decreased, so they probably tried to imagine the clashes of smaller units, which always took place, along with major battles, in such a peculiar way. Well, let's say, really, one could try to simulate the loss of an army from an attack on its foraging squads at the expense of agents (analogy - Hannibal in Italy). But even in this case, I do not think that the army can be weakened by more than 20-30% in size. Well, what kind of food poisoning is this, every turn is repeated ??? I understand, I am still that historian. But, nevertheless, let someone give me an example from the history of wars of the Ancient World of this kind. In general, about the agents in RTB2 - no comment.

For the rest, in general, there are no complaints.
- The number of armies has decreased => one battle is much more important. Most of the campaigns of the Ancient World were won by 1-2 major battles. Well, I really do not say what the flow of meat to the front was in the 1st part - it's just an analogy with the Second World War can be drawn.
- The city has a local garrison, the besieging army suffers losses. In RTV1, if you remember, only the besieged suffered losses.
- I have never paid any attention to the schedule, but here even it pleases me.
- In general, AI per strat. The map has some tricks, but basically all of them are based on this bug with agents - he strongly poisons your armies, weakens them, separates them and attacks one with the whole mass. Well ... at least so ... whatever the child does not amuse himself, as they say.
- In tactical mode, of course, progress is obvious. In RTV1 I very actively used armies consisting only of cavalry and archers. ... Here it will no longer work: the bot cavalry can still be defeated separately from the main forces, but the skirmishers will not work - they, as a rule, are always under the cover of their main forces, so cavalry raids are doomed here.
Well, here they complain, they say, the battles are too fast .... Well, if it is stupid at the beginning of the battle to give the whole mass the order "For batch!", Then it will probably come out quickly. If actions are counted, then I do not think that the battle will seem so straightforward fleeting. Well ... judging by the comments of the most zealous local "strategists", the word "count" is hardly familiar to them. Trolled of course)) But, before you smear the AI, play at least at the "very difficult" level. Although, of course,
- Diplomacy has become better - there are signs of at least some adequacy on the part of the AI. In the first part, diplomacy was generally an empty phrase - nothing more.

Well, in spite of the rather controversial opinions, you shouldn't regret buying a license in any case. RTB2 is already, in a sense, a classic during its lifetime, like any game in the Total Vo series.