Rome Total Realism vs EB

[Intranetusa]

Which is the better mod and which should I get?

Cuz I've heard the 2 have similar features, such as a new campaign map extending to India, and the new Egyptian-Pytolmic dynasty, and I've looked at the features. However, the RTR website doesn't give a detailed, indepth description of all the features.


Does EB focus more on the barbarian tribes & other factions while RTR focus primarily on the Romans???




Also, does Carthage get its legendary circular ports & huge naval fleet? (As it did historically)

[Orb]

I haven't actually tried RTR, but from what I've heard about it, I don't think I will.

EB has a beautiful and deep trait system, subtle interplay of nations and the Romans and Greeks receive as much attention as the barbarians.

[Geoffrey S]

A loaded question, requiring thoughtful answers and mainly boiling down to personal preferences. At the moment, for me EB in its current state is the preferred mod. I'm looking forward to trying RTR 7.0 when it's released; the current release though is also a definite improval over vanilla Rome and certainly worth trying.

Why not install both? It's a simple matter of copying your Rome folder, certainly so if you've got enough space. Both mods are definitely worthwhile.

[Kugutsu]

If you have the HDD space, install both and see which you prefer!

EB certainly does it for me. Incredible detail in all factions (not just barbarians), a unique traiting system that makes your family members into individuals, and generally an awsome gameplay experience all round. I can (and have) quite happily spend hours just reading the unit cards about the history and uses of the various units, which are an education in themselves.

Im afraid I cant comment on RTR, having never felt the need to try it after finding EB, but Im sure someone will be able to tell you how they compare.

[bovi]

Some people favor one, some the other. I've played both, and my choice is EB, but RTR has a lot of good in it too. Why not try them both, and decide for yourself?

[Intranetusa]

Can those of you who have tried both RTR and EB tell me the difference between the two??? (significant differences)

because I've read the description off of the EB website and this forum (and RTR site has no detailed description) and it doesn't really tell me much about either games.

[oudysseos]

I haven't played RTR for quite some time: since 6.0 came out in fact, and I never installed the PLatinum edition, but two cents worth is that RTR is great until you try EB. Many of the elements will be familiar: The Egyptians changed to the Ptolemies and so on. RTR also has a Zone of Recruitment element for mercs; I don't remember how well developed its faction recruitment was but I am sure it's not as advanced as EB.
What EB has much more of than RTR 6.0 is depth: RTR doesn't have all the units/buildings etc. in the correct native languages, or all of the faction specific wonders or really any of the role-play elements that EB has. Or the amazing latin, greek and celtic voice mods. It's an improvement over vanilla but doesn't go as far as EB. And the EB units are newer and prettier and as far as I can tell more historically accurate.
What RTR has that EB does not is a whole constellation of minimods that allows you to customize your install. There's a great 4 turns per year mod, an interesting naval mod, a polytheism mod that I wish EB would incorporate, a metropolis mod: you can really make the game your own, giving you lots of options if you're interested in the nuts and bolts of modding.
RTR 7.0 has posted some very interesting ideas that I'm keen to see the results of, especially their whole batch file/unlimited factions deal, but I am reserving judgement on it til it comes out as it might not work out quite so well in reality.

To sum up, EB trumps RTR in most areas and is definitely more challenging and harder, so if you want an easy intro to RTW mods, try RTR first and then EB. The hardest mod of all, for gameplay, is Arthurian Total War. Fantastic mod, fiendishly difficult to succeed at.

[Intranetusa]

thanks for the info.

Does anyone know which mod RTR or EB have the unqiue buildings?
ie. Egyptian pyramids in Egpyt or massive Carthaginian circular docks?

[Lovejoy]

Both are great mods.

EB
+Very historical
+Good skins
+TRAITS!
+Deap!
+Hard(er)
-Runs slow
-Still beta

RTR
+Tons of user mods, like imperator.
+Multiplayer community
+Some of the best skins ever.
+Runs fast
-Kinda easy

And both have there ups and downs. Play and love em both! :D

[Gazius]

RTR is what RTW should have been.
EB is the game that made me drop almost every other game. I might play a few others now and then, but I'm always back to EB. No other game can compare. RTR 7 may make a challenge, but as I see it:

RTR is a one night stand, EB is a happy marriage.

[GodEmperorLeto]

I'd honestly go with the whole "install and try both" idea, and decide for yourself. I mean, in some ways, you are comparing the two, and making them compete against one another. That's somewhat unfair. The guys at RTR have worked very hard to put out their mod, just like the guys at EB. Both mods deserve respect and appreciation. It is cheapening the work that the guys at RTR to say that EB is better.

Nevertheless, if EB is better, then that is simply because the guys here have gone so far above and beyond that it is incredible. But comparing the two is suggesting that the two are in competition, and I don't see it as such.

[Fondor_Yards]

This isn't the place to be asking this question. It's like going to boston and asking if they like the Red Socks or Yankees more. But as someone who played both , I have to say EB is better. RTR is RTW on steroids. EB is RTR on radioactive super godly steroids of doom.





thanks for the info.

Does anyone know which mod RTR or EB have the unqiue buildings?
ie. Egyptian pyramids in Egpyt or massive Carthaginian circular docks?

IIRC RTR only has the normal wonders in it. And considering it seems every other town in EB has a unqiue building, EB does.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

I've always favored the old cake vs. pie comparison. But I'll admit in advance that I'm definitely a cake man myself, so I'm quite biased. They're both good, but by God, make mine cake!

[Marius's Mule]

I just installed EB this past weekend. I've been playing RTR. One thing i don't like about RTR, is that there isn't much variety in the Roman Legion. In Vanilla RTW, you had the Urban Cohort, Praterion Cohort, regular legionnaires, early legionnaires, and multiple cavalry, archer and artillery units. In RTR, you don't have Roman archer, so you have to hire Cretan Archers. There is also only two types of infantry after the Marius reform. You can train different types of units when you conquer other cities and installed the proper buildings so that kind of makes up for it, but it's not the same. Besides that, I love the game.

EB seems(remember..i've only played it this weekend) to be a good game. I played about 8 hours of it. Still trying to figure things out like how to increase the generals command ratings. I've had one general tearing up the northern frontier, capturing about 4 cities in a 2 year span, defeated multiple armies on the field, and he only has 2 stars, and they been pretty evenly stacked and i have demolished the enemy. Some things that are cool is the deep traiting system, although i wish their command ability would increase faster especially if they have good intelligence, charisma and varility, and how you can install different types of government. Although, i do find EB pretty easy. Last time i've check, my win loss record is around 38 - 1, and i think that loss was a navel loss. And i'm playing on VH/H. One more thing that seems to be a problem, is that the game runs really slow, and my computer isn't that old. I have a 2.66 ghz pent 4 computer, 512 mb ram, and a new graphic card which i can't remember how fast it is right now.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

With a 2.66 Ghz pent 4, you should think about bumping up to a gig of RAM. You'll notice a really big difference in EB if you did do that. I've got a 1.3 Ghz Athlon and a gig of RAM running in it - my battles are slow, but only because I insist on having huge sized armies.

As for command stars, what makes a bigger difference in battle are the morale bonuses. Check your general's traits out carefully and if he's really good and got lots of morale bonuses, or command stars for fighting in certain situations then you'll realize when and where are the best places to use him - on campaign or at home, defending or attacking, leading or accompanying, etc.

Finally, I think most team members expect 0.81 to be more difficult because of the financial situation. Mines got a little out of hand with 0.80.

[Olaf The Great]

Being the Pessimist I am, I usually compare the problems between the two,

EB
-Slightly slower if you have a bad computer(and) insist on large or huge battles.
-Traveling the Map can get a bit...Annoying if you're accustomed to traveling long distances with no rest(Migration)
If you feel that you need to Migrate, turn off the scripts.
-Harder(Bad or Good) In my opinion, good.
-If an enemies treasurey goes into the red, they gain vast amounts of money(has some bad things, like with Eperios, because of their elephants, their money goes into the red by the 3rd turn and because of the money increase, they start steamrolling) In my opinion, this is good for a military challenge.
-At its Current build certain factions don't ...Move..At all
1-Lustonann
2-Macedon(depends on Epeirotes and KH)
3-Sweboz
4-Sauromatae
5-Saka
6-Casse
In the next build it will be fixed, and if you decide to play as those factions, its not much of a problem.

RTR
-Its mostly an enhanced RTW
-No Scripts
-A bit..Easy(Good..Or bad) My opinion, Bad
-Trait system not complex
-Some factions are weak and are destroyed easily(Illryia)
-Some places on the map are much too crowded(Italy,Greece and Syria)
-Not as Historically accurate as they claim.

I prefer EB, my computer can take the game,the scripts are nice, Vibrant Faction colors, Historically Accurate and much more.

[Bar Kochba]

ask this question on the RTR fourms then compare notes

[Gaias]

I would have to say that RTR is how many people that play RTW got introduced to the game, and that EB is what is continuing their interest.

[MiniMe]

Mines got a little out of hand with 0.80.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

EB vs RTR is like Argiraspidae Torakitae vs Spartans =)

The only reason to install RTR are their elephants skins and textures =)
Since EB team has a lot of things to do and they are not going to reskin their elephants in the near future, I’ve modded EB for myself, importing RTR Indian armored elephants and their crews in it (took some time, not only you have to copy their skins in EB folder, but also adjust many files, I’m a bit proud of myself actually, never modding anything before :2thumbsup: )

As for the rest… even if somehow RTR 7.0 is going to happen out of shining nowhere, the only reason I would install it is as a source of alternative skins and textures. And that's it.

[Thaatu]

EB requires more attention from the player, while RTR is lighter and more pleasing to the eye.

[kalkwerk]

Well you should play EB thats quite obvious.

Concerning RTR thats an excellent mod too, but you shouldnt play it without minimods, which there are lots of:

I suggest RTR AE (3.0 coming up "soon".) MetroNavalmod, ItalianInfantrymod, navigable rivers.
TFT - Play as Pompeius, Caesar, Crassus or Verchingetorix
77 BC Twilight of the republic (coming up "soon")
Imperator II - Rome centred mod with pretty hard first years if you are up to a challenge

All those are for PE 1.6 or 1.7.

[iamphet]

As other posters have noticed, there are a lot of mods for RTR. For completeness I'd recommend Extended Realism Mod for RTR. Together with Candearius' guide it adds role-playing flavour to the game.

[Shifty_GMH]

I played RTR Gold for several months before downloading EB .80. I would recommend downloading and playing RTR Gold first. Once you have completed a campaign then download and play EB. EB .81 will hopefully, (fingers crossed), be out shortly and is not save-game compatible with EB .80. RTR Gold is definately an EB light......but well worth playing. RTR 7.0 does look promising, but I read somewhere that it probably won't be released till Q2 of 2007.

I have not played RTR:PE. So i can not recommend it one way or the other.

[oudysseos]

Or rather than install all theos minimods to RTR, what with compatability issues and so on, you could just play EB. It's your one stop shop for gaming excellence.

[Birka Viking]

Well I havent played RTR for a very longtime. But from my experience with RTR I can only say this. What RTR did with the original Vanilla game, EB did with RTR.
Cheers

[paullus]

I'll add this:

I get better battlefield framerates with RTR. But that's partly because I have the graphics options too high with EB because a lot of the units look soooo good.

But I'd say it boils down especially to this:

If you want to learn about the ancient world (its a lot of fun!) then EB is the way to go. It has more and better information, and not just in the military sector, than in many layman's ancient histories, and is better in some areas than quite a few scholarly works.

And yet its tremendously fun to play...sweet.

[iamphet]

Or rather than install all theos minimods to RTR, what with compatability issues and so on, you could just play EB. It's your one stop shop for gaming excellence.
Yes. With RTR you can select which features you want, with EB you must use them all.

[Intranetusa]

Comparing the feedback, I'm gonna try EB first.

Is there any change to the difficulty setting on EB?
ie. Does battle AI on H and battle AI pm VH still give unfair advantages to the AI like it did in vanilla RTW? And how much harder is the campaign AI?

(I've read the interview of EB, it and wasn't very clear on this issue)


Also, I have barbarian invasions. Will installing EB delete my BI saved games or make BI not work?

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Hi there,
Fortunately the AI on the battlefield in Europa Barbarorum is slightly superior to that of vanilla. It seems to manage it's forces much better due to EB's formations and it also now seems to try flanking moves much more frequently. It is not brilliantly improved, but it still is much more challenging.

Sadly Hard or Very Hard on the battlefield still does give the AI insane bonuses. I think, however, that this problem is hardcoded. The best way to avoid this is to play battles on Medium or Easy. In Medium the AI gets no bonuses and neither do you, but on the contrary, in Easy you get bonuses and the AI gets penalties.

Luckily EB does not effect your Barbarian invasion installation. All of your BI saves should survive your installation. Good luck and enjoy your campaign. Cheers.

[ElectricEel]

Is there any change to the difficulty setting on EB?
ie. Does battle AI on H and battle AI pm VH still give unfair advantages to the AI like it did in vanilla RTW? And how much harder is the campaign AI?

The effects of difficulty levels aren't moddable, so no. I understand the recommended settings are Normal battle difficulty and Very Hard campaign map difficulty. The campaign should be more challenging than vanilla RTW.

[Intranetusa]

thanks for the info. I always play on M battle/VH campaign anyways. :)

[CaesarAugustus]

The effects of difficulty levels aren't moddable, so no. I understand the recommended settings are Normal battle difficulty and Very Hard campaign map difficulty. The campaign should be more challenging than vanilla RTW.

What exactly is the difference between a M campaign and a VH campaign? Are there improved naval invasions or increased Autoresolve casualties? Or does it just give the AI more money?

[Intranetusa]

On VH, the allies went send much larger stacks at you. Also, your allies will often double cross and attack you. Furthermore, getting an alliance with neutral countries is virtually impossible. And ceasefire negotiations are also very hard to get.

[mcantu]

Those who dont feel RTR is deep enough should try the Extended Realism Mod for RTRPE w/ the BI exe...good stuff

[econ21]

I wrote a longish post comparing EB and RTR a while back. It's a perennial subject:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1191959&postcount=3

Since then EB has had the 0.8 patch, which avoids the reinforcement CTD bug that killed earlier versions of the mod for me. But I am still waiting for 0.81 before diving back in, hopefully by a PBM.

I have played a lot more RTR Platinum, mainly in the Will of the Senate PBM, which most of the participants really enjoyed. I particularly liked the Metropolis mod that stripped most settlements of their walls, as I found sieging wooden walled minor settlements tedious beyond belief.

I stick by my original opinion that the two mods are very similar in aim and execution. Most reasonable people who like one should appreciate the similar qualities in the other. I'd say currently EB is deeper in the history and more ambitious (e.g. with the traits) but RTR is more polished. I think both are amazing efforts.

[edyzmedieval]

Try them both. As an EB developer, I liked them both, but there's one thing I didn;t like at all at RTR: - historical accuracy.

Not as historic as they claim.
Examples, so you'll see for yourself:

-Thessalian Cavalry Mercenaries recruitable in Gaza o_O
-The Ptolemies have a city in Europe, near Byzantium. Huh? The Ptolemies never set a foot in Europe near Byz.

[blacksnail]

As an EB developer I clearly enjoy EB. However I was a big fan of RTR 6.0 and had a lot of fun with that mod. I really liked the third party customizations that were added in and thought they added a lot to the game. I'm looking forward to checking out RTR 7.0 when it's released.

[blacksnail]

-Thessalian Cavalry Mercenaries recruitable in Gaza o_O
When it comes to issues involving messed up recruitment, EB should really not be the one to throw the first stone. ~:)

[paullus]

Not as historic as they claim.
Examples, so you'll see for yourself:

-The Ptolemies have a city in Europe, near Byzantium. Huh? The Ptolemies never set a foot in Europe near Byz.

Edyz, the Ptolemaioi controlled Maroneia and several other S. Thraikian cities, as well as the island Thasos, until around 245 or so, after which only a small foothold was held until near the end of the 3rd century. I think it was too small to be worth adding a province for EB, kinda like the small Ptolemaic possessions in Karia and Lykia (though I'm still a little miffed that Ephesos isn't in the map). The S. Thraikian possessions were the key to recruiting large numbers of Thraikians and Galatians (from Tylis) into the Ptolemaic army.

Now its been ages since I played RTR, and perhaps their province is too big (it would seriously be a little dibit in the southern coastline across from Thasos), but there was a justification for it. Oh, and if the dates I gave above are off, I tried to check them in my Holbl, but I couldn't find him. Cheers all.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Hehe. I just looked at Holbl too when I saw that. He doesn't say much of anything about it. I wish he had been able to write the book at basically twice the page numbers he did - so we could have had lots more detail. :grin:

[McHrozni]

On VH, the allies went send much larger stacks at you. Also, your allies will often double cross and attack you. Furthermore, getting an alliance with neutral countries is virtually impossible. And ceasefire negotiations are also very hard to get.

Fairly annoying - the AI is way too keen to betray you on normal, and not really ready to admit the obvious when to comes to ceasefire options.

The only strategy game with a decent diplomatic AI that I know of was Imperialism II. It's too bad no one can learn from that old classic. There the AI actually considered your military strength before deciding on attacking or allying with you.

McHrozni

[-Praetor-]

I wrote a longish post comparing EB and RTR a while back. It's a perennial subject:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1191959&postcount=3

I think your review is worth to reproduce:


For what it is worth, my impression so far is that the mods have a very similar underlying philosophy. They aim at making RTW more realistic, both by altering the content (maps, units etc) and the combat system (kill speeds, morale levels, balance of arms etc). In this, I think they both succeed very well. I've played both and greatly admire them for this. The units look great and the combat feels "right", as well as having the more deliberate feel of the combat I enjoyed in STW and MTW.

My impression so far is that EB has more historical research and work so that it deviates rather more from vanilla than RTR. However, RTR is still in progression. For example, RTR 6.2 has done a lot of work on the Romans and Germans, but the Gauls for one could use a little more love and will apparently get that in 7.0.

In terms of the combat system, they use different ways of getting there but I have found RTR 6.0 and EB rather similar in terms of how long heavy infantry melees last and how effective missiles are etc. If anything I'd say cavalry is rather more powerful (and relatively cheaper) in EB than RTR 6.0 but I am happy with either representation.

Both mods also aim to restrict or slow the recruitment of units outside of your factions natural "homelands". Again, they have different ways of doing this but they both work to a similar effect and add to the game's realism, and difficulty level. They also do some other stuff to raise the challenge - e.g. making the economy tighter and giving the player's general's less command stars.

Both mods alter naval combat to make it better. In RTR 6.0, tweaking the stats has made naval combat more bloody and decisive. In EB, fleets are very expensive and so again the combat is more decisive. Different means, similar result. I guess that's a theme of this comparison?

The mods have rather different campaign maps. IIRC, RTR took the area covered by the vanilla map [CORRECTION: apparently, they extended it to the east] and increased the number of provinces. My impression is that EB has a roughly similar number of provinces in the original RTW area but has extended the map south and especially east. Again, different approaches but similar result - a bigger sandpit to play in!

Both mods have unified the Romans and dropped the Senate (reviewer sheds a quick tear at the loss of the fun Senate missions). They have rather different faction line ups - they both represent the "big players" of the period but, if you want to play the ancient Britons, don't play RTR. If you want to play the Numidians, don't play EB. etc

EB have done some very fun things with the trait system and related stuff. Some generals can compete in the Olympics, others get triumphs etc. Some factions don't even have offspring anymore but choose generals through a "man of the hour". RTR seems more like vanilla in these respects, IIRC. On a related point, EB have changed the faction victory conditions whereas RTR still requires "conquer 50 provinces" (making playing the 40 province Seleucids rather a short game).

Finally, EB is a beta whereas RTR is a more finished product that has been patched many times. I can't recall encountering a CTD in RTR (well, I lie - I think it was in 6.0 - I won as Rome and was rewarded with a CTD! anti-climatic at the time but at least, I'd finished my campaign). However, I am getting daily or more crashes with EB (I'm around 243 BC in my Roman game). I can work around them, but it is taking a lot of willpower to keep playing. There are also other aspects of EB that seem frustrating because it is a beta - for example, AI bribery of my towns is making my game not fun (taking a city once is fine, but having to keep retaking it due to some diplomat is not so great).

Bottomline - I think they are both amazing mods. Incredibly ambitious and with ambitions that perfectly suit my tilt. They are both massive endeavours, involving many people and changing RTW in a myriad of ways. They transform RTW from an ultimately unchallenging and occasionally annoyingly ahistorical strategy game into a serious historical wargame that is fun to play. To some extent, they are the Pepsi and Coke of RTW mods - they are really remarkable similar. If forced to identify differences, at the moment, I would say RTR is more polished and playable whereas EB is more ambitious and promising. But I don't wish to offend either team, whose works have given me a lot of pleasure now and will continue to do so in the future.

I think your review is very good, but it misses two things.

First, and it`s something that you`ve already pointed out in your post, is that EB has been greatly (enormously is a more accurate word) improved since 0.74. The stability problems are almost gone, and with the future 0.81 patch, almost all CTD bugs will be gone (at least, all known CTD`s, like Massilioi hoplitae, Darioritum, Rebelling City). Also, not considering that the Massilioi Hoplitae and the Rebelling City one are solved by the comunity, and the Darioritum CTD is easily avoidable.

So, it will be even more stable as it is now. But let`s consider that your review was written before 0.8, so it can`t have all the skin improvements, the unit cards, GUI, Voicemods, Musicmods, building sistem and recritment sistem, and all the innumerable little improvements that 0.8 brought to the mod.

Second, the review doesn`t emphasise the trait sistem of the mod (other than saying that your generals can get olympics and triumphs). That`s too bad, cuz the Trait sistem is one of the chief achivements of the mod, and something on which EB is unsurpassed and unique.

But, as I said, I like your review.

Cheers!!!

[Obelics]

one think that i dont like of RTR, and make me hate to play as romans, is that there are some "italians" troops available in Italia. Now i cant say nothink on greek, gauls etc, i have less "sensibility" on that due to my lack of informations. But i cant read in an Historical mod (foucused on accuracy), Italian cavalry, and italian skirmishers. And they refer often at italic people like "italians". Now being italian, i cant understand why there is not so much sensibility on a simply linguistic matter like this. There are not Italians, there are only "Italics" (substantive). and there are not italian skirmishers etc, but only "Italic skirmishers".

This is not a sort of patriottic think. Is just a linguistical think. Romans are not Italians. They are Italics. Samnites are not Italians, they are Italics. Etrurians are not italians, they are italics (and not in history, but in modern languages). And this difference is not an historical difference, but a difference that exist in a modern language like english, italian, french etc. I cant understand why this is not accurate. When i read "italians" i dont think to ancient italic people (adjective) but to modern italians, and that make me laugh.

So a mod that is accurate (both linguistically and historically) shoud use the correct adjectives / substantives.

I know this can be seen as a minor think by some people, but as i sayd it is just a matter of accuracy.

The difference between Italics / italians is like the difference that exist between gaul / french, Iberian / spanish. And i repeat im not referring on history, but just to the use of the words that do the modern languages.

PS: some people talked about the amount of "mini-mods" that they exists, well, every minimod i checked has the same mistake. And when i presented the problem in the forum, the answer was somethink like this: "we need fonts!". Well, after have debated for a while, i renounced. The only fonts availables is a good modern english dictionary.

[Intranetusa]

Fairly annoying - the AI is way too keen to betray you on normal, and not really ready to admit the obvious when to comes to ceasefire options.

The only strategy game with a decent diplomatic AI that I know of was Imperialism II. It's too bad no one can learn from that old classic. There the AI actually considered your military strength before deciding on attacking or allying with you.

McHrozni

On Very hard campaign mode, your ally will doublecross you 80% of the time if your territory touches theirs...from what I've experienced with Macedonia and Carthage.

So far, I have never ever gotten a ceasefire negotation (one time, I even offered 10,000 denrii + 20 cities as a test, and they were down to 2 cities...and they still rejected a ceasfire)

[Tuuvi]

would've been funny if they accepted...

I have never played RTR, but my impression is that EB is very complex, while RTR is more simple.

[silverster]

I played them both and i like them both

RTR is a more complete product (reliable etc), I played few campaigns with RTR and RTR:PE, got to say RTR is a lot more pleasing to the eye (one word, beautiful), the textures are a lot better than the ones we have with EB, (besides the spears, I have hard time telling the difference between Hastati and Rotarri [sp?] in EB). And RTR (especially PE) is very user friendly, so you know exactly what is going on and which unit is which (eg: when it says spear man on the title, it's a spearman... not a long sword welding german/gaul dude... )

But EB is a more Authentic, complete game (more detailed gameplay), pity i dont understand latin so i am sort of confused all the time (what the heck is this i am supposed to build... LOL). but EB scripting is better, a lot better. Albit a little overkill on the traits (Scroll scroll scroll.... not there yet.....) and Eb is a lot more historic, and armies are a lot more "Legion" like (Love the forts guys!!!) But a Legio banner as a auxilliary for the characters would be nice.

I hightly anyone who hasnt played RTW mods to play recommend RTR: Platinum Edition with Imperator II mod, very nice combo, it positions perfectly between RTR and EB.

[Grand Lord of Poop~]

well, the new 0.8 includes all the english name in parenthesis after the authentic name, if i remember correctly (or I may have just installed a mod that changes it). so i think that issue is solved. plus, isn't it much better. personally, i prefer all native names regardless of how cheesy they sound. it adds a huge amount of immersion into the game. you really feel like you're playing the baktrians instead of just some random nut scrapping together a whole bunch of units (vanilla, anyone?) besides, you should not undermine the massive efforts of all the hardworking skinners making EB. If we compare the skins, i could honestly say that EB is better than RTR, but of course, that is a matter of personal taste. :yes:

[Obelics]

and i could add that a comparison in this sense is very strange, even m2tw from far far away is not comparable to EB... we are speaking of very different products. RTR is aimed to adjust RTW, while EB is a totally new game, is not RTW. (and me too prefer the EB skins, even for the acclaimed romans...)

[Birka Viking]

and i could add that a comparison in this sense is very strange, even m2tw from far far away is not comparable to EB... we are speaking of very different products. RTR is aimed to adjust RTW, while EB is a totally new game, is not RTW. (and me too prefer the EB skins, even for the acclaimed romans...)

I can only agree with you! :yes:

[Intranetusa]

EVERYTHING IS IN LATIN!!?!!??!???

Waa???? I think I'll try RTR before EB if that's the case.... :(

[Sarcasm]

Breathe.

You'll hear Romans speak Latin when you click on them, and names are in Latin too. However, a translation and description are provided in english.

[Kull]

EVERYTHING IS IN LATIN!!?!!??!???

Waa???? I think I'll try RTR before EB if that's the case.... :(


:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Thanks for that, best laugh i've had in days! And not at your expense. Just that EB has a number of very fervent, "accuracy-above-all" members, and I was visualizing somebody putting that idea up for vote in an internal poll! :sweatdrop:

[Intranetusa]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Thanks for that, best laugh i've had in days! And not at your expense. Just that EB has a number of very fervent, "accuracy-above-all" members, and I was visualizing somebody putting that idea up for vote in an internal poll! :sweatdrop:


:D You're welcome

[Intranetusa]

I hope the campaign AI is better in EB cuz in RTW, even on VH campaign, the AI sucked badly...never assaulting my cities during seiges and the Romans, Carthage, and Greeks conquering only 1-2 cities every 50 years.

[bovi]

You'll definitely have more trouble from the AI in EB, not because it is improved but because it gets a monetary gift each turn to offset its natural inclination to do extremely stupid things. Some AI factions are slow to expand, but those who were successful in history tend to be successfully expanding in most of the games.

[Intranetusa]

very nice. :)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Thanks for that, best laugh i've had in days! And not at your expense. Just that EB has a number of very fervent, "accuracy-above-all" members, and I was visualizing somebody putting that idea up for vote in an internal poll! :sweatdrop:

Check EBH.

OT: I can't really add to what's been said here other than to say that RTR is probably more "pick up and play" EB adds a lot of depth but it does take some getting used to.

What I can say for definate though is that EB is a labour of love.

[L.C.Cinna]

Hehe. I just looked at Holbl too when I saw that. He doesn't say much of anything about it. I wish he had been able to write the book at basically twice the page numbers he did - so we could have had lots more detail. :grin:


I'll check if he said more about it in his lectures if I'll be able to find my notes again lol

[Intranetusa]

eb and RTR both have a united Roman faction, do they still have senates? and senate missions?

[CountArach]

eb and RTR both have a united Roman faction, do they still have senates? and senate missions?

Nope, though I think RTR is planning to still have a Civil War event for RTR 7.0

[econ21]

eb and RTR both have a united Roman faction, do they still have senates? and senate missions?

I liked the Senate missions and Civil War in the original RTW, as they added it a bit of spice to the proceedings. There's a nicely done RTR PE 1.6 mod (SnakeIV's Roman Faction Mod 2) that brings back the 3 Roman factions and the senate missions:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=56011&page=1&highlight=snakeiv

Playing as Julii it was surprisingly challenging - the initial economy is very tight.

BTW, nice to see this thread has remained friendly and constructive. :bow: The Org is littered with locked RTR vs EB threads that went downhill in pointless mod bashing.

[Gazius]

I liked the Senate missions and Civil War in the original RTW.

I never bothered to play far enough in RTW to get to the civil war, but I always thought the Senate missions were nice as well. I'd like to see more missions myself in EB, as I find they add to re-playability to the game, see if you can get the triumphus, or a encouragement to advance upon ptolemy's capital to restore Alexanders body.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We might have more if we had more scripters. We basically have one, whereas we used to have three. But having scripters who make lots of mistakes or aren't interested in really getting good at it is probably worse. We're just happy Atilius is still working on things for us -- and there are some new things he has in store, but not for 0.81.

[Intranetusa]

I'll be waiting for the next EB version :).

Since RTR has these features, I'll dload and try that out in the meantime.



btw, sEgypt losing all of its Old Kingdom units in EB. chariots included... Cuz i luved the shiny scalemale bowmen and the lethal chariots.

[Tuuvi]

I think the senate missions should be optional, because some people (me included) didn't really like them. I hated it when I was busy doing something, and then all of a sudden a stupid senate mission pops up and if I don't do it my chars won't get elected to office :furious3: very frustrating.

[Intranetusa]

a fixed "improved" version of the senate, of course

[QwertyMIDX]

Not gonna happen. There's WAY too much hardcode around the senate for us to really do much with it, and we'd rathre have the extra faction (Saba) than the senate.

[Atilius]

... there are some new things he has in store, but not for 0.81.

There is one new thing: I'm trying to start the First Punic War...

[Intranetusa]

What is the hardware requirements for EB?
As in video card/memory/CPU/etc? I've already dloaded it but ppl on another forum say I need to upgrade my video card to a Geforce 7 series.

[russia almighty]

You got punk'd . SPQR is the mod with the crazy ass requirements over vanilla . EB is basically the same requirements wise . Whats your set up now?

[Kull]

There is one new thing: I'm trying to start the First Punic War...

We don't usually plug in something which comes largely from popular demand, but in this case it's a "Fan Feature" that all of us like. :2thumbsup:

(and a very sweet and swift effort by Atilius to code it, I might add!)

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

What is the hardware requirements for EB?
As in video card/memory/CPU/etc? I've already dloaded it but ppl on another forum say I need to upgrade my video card to a Geforce 7 series.
Good news Intranetusa! Those people are incorrect. EB needs a slightly better PC than vanilla to run everything at good pace, but otherwise, on normal unit size, EB copes fine on a PC which had the minimum system requirements to run R:TW. Good luck and cheers!

[Intranetusa]

thanks :)

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Looks like this has been concluded also with the last post.

Closed.