Impressions of the game [v.2] (Total War: Rome 2)
Old topic 1. Overflowing 2. And it is overflowing with nifiga not with impressions, but with bickering of impressionable and apparently aggressive people. Be quiet, do not swear, write your opinion about the game, and peacefully discuss its sides, pros and cons. But peacefully, do not get personal, everyone has a subjective opinion and everyone has the right to count as he wants, no need to persuade, concisely express your point of view. And that's all, but PEACEFULLY, WITHOUT OFFENSES, WITHOUT. OK? OK.I will clean the topic.
Old thread: http://forums.playground.ru/total_war_rome_2/793711/
Partner001
Here the man of the "mythical Empires" remembered, at first I also thought it was an invention of the developers. Then I read in Wikipedia that "empires" turns out to be a really existing concept, that is. the scope of powers of senior officials, which varied depending on peace / war, support of the Senate, etc.
I remember when Medieval: Total War came out there, the Russian princes had names like "Goat", "Hare", "Damn" and also the people excited, "they say they've been screwed up again, they don't know the Russian language." Then it turned out that these were real names, from which surnames such as Kozlov, Zaitsev and others came :)
Aleksator
Well, the army chops wood in the nearest forest and builds primitive vessels, what is surprising here? a large fleet of military triremes, quadrimes, etc., takes a long time to build, and for Pompey to Greece yesterday it was necessary to sail
the game is a failure, in the whole series there has not yet been such a wretched game
Aleksator
Medival is very good, and Shogun also had high marks, although I personally did not like him))
The system with garbage dumps is complete nonsense to mine, like a pottery building or a treasury can cause discontent, absurdity. The computer is too smart on the battlefield, instantly reacts to change, there is a feeling that the general has observation from a satellite and each detachment has a walkie-talkie, and they are coordinated by a whole headquarters of analysts in real time, and how barbarians are generally able to fight worse than Napoleon. Archers are blunt and do not shoot as expected, at least as an enemy, in general, the only way to win is to crush it with numbers, it is not interesting to play, in Napoleon it was possible to beat an army two to three times superior, and the shooters were not like that without protective shtsykuns.