I heard it was out and I guess...

[Kadagar_AV]

Ok... So I just found out TW: Rome 2 was out.

I thought about getting it, but after the Mediaval 2 TW release (who the **** release a game with a completely dead battle AI??) I am very hesitant as they actually never fixed even the MAJOR bugs.

I haven't been in the loop at all, and I have not looked at this sub part of the forum.

But my guesses are:

1. The PvP mode is in shambles, and will never hit the international scene.
2. The AI makes even children go "really!?"
3. There is a lot of game-breaking bugs.
4. They still haven't solved the issue of having to fight meaningless battles you really don't want to be bothered with.
5. The graphics are better but not at all optimized for any sort of computer setup.

I only guess this because it has been like this since the last Rome title from CA.

My question would be, am I right... And can wait until I get it for free from some friend who got overly over the game quite fast...?

Or have CA actually embraced this millenium for once?

[Hooahguy]

AI is hit-or miss for now, but with each patch its getting better.

I have yet to encounter any game breaking bugs, but others have. Initially it was littered with them, but as with the AI, its getting better. I mean if you arent too enthusiastic about the time period, Id wait for a sale or something.

Personally, I love it, but Im also using a bunch of mods, so take that as you will.

EDIT: Supposedly it was pushed out too early by Sega and now CA has to pick up the pieces and patch it the best they can, but thats unconfirmed, but thats what I think, considering how there are things in the in-game encyclopedia that arent in the game.

I have 25 hours or so in the game right now, Im just having a hard time finding time to play it.

[AntiDamascus]

It plays, even on my 7 year old PC. It's way better post patches. The AI is sometimes hit or miss. If you're on the fence wait for a sale but it's a game I'm getting hours of play out of now.

[Sp4]

With the way you are looking at this, don't bother.

[ShadesPanther]

It has improved a lot since release and there are some very good mods that dramatically increase playability (at least for me).

I really recommend Radious Total War mod
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forum...-Total-War-Mod

[Barkhorn1x]

With the way you are looking at this, don't bother.

Well, unless he loves the period. If not I would pass too as all you will see are the negatives.

[The Stranger]

Ok... So I just found out TW: Rome 2 was out.

I thought about getting it, but after the Mediaval 2 TW release (who the **** release a game with a completely dead battle AI??) I am very hesitant as they actually never fixed even the MAJOR bugs.

I haven't been in the loop at all, and I have not looked at this sub part of the forum.

But my guesses are:

1. The PvP mode is in shambles, and will never hit the international scene.
2. The AI makes even children go "really!?"
3. There is a lot of game-breaking bugs.
4. They still haven't solved the issue of having to fight meaningless battles you really don't want to be bothered with.
5. The graphics are better but not at all optimized for any sort of computer setup.

I only guess this because it has been like this since the last Rome title from CA.

My question would be, am I right... And can wait until I get it for free from some friend who got overly over the game quite fast...?

Or have CA actually embraced this millenium for once?

not gonna comment on the rest, since i havent played post patch since the battle speed is too fast so i cant be bothered to play. but they did kinda fix point 4. the autoresolve has really improved, so you can pretty much get the same results with autoresolve, or you will know before hand what kind of results you will most likely get.

[Zarobien]

1. The PvP mode is in shambles, and will never hit the international scene.

R2TW PvP is like RTW PvP but with more lag and less response to user commands. So ye it's a fail unless you are a real fan.

2. The AI makes even children go "really!?"

Campaign AI and Diplomacy is really bad. It doesnt seem to be aware of what is going around it and it doesnt seem to set any major goals for itself. It just sits there defending what it has.

Battlemap AI is also bad. It is playing only one strategy and when it cant see you it is playing no strategy. This may be the result of Campaign AI building bad armies for it.

3. There is a lot of game-breaking bugs.

I actually havent encountered that many. I have constant graphical bugs that look like black squares where there should be textures. And the other one is that cavarly doesnt obey command to whitdraw at all or resets every second. And merceneries take the "buildup" cost on every turn. But I can play; Just not use mercs and use charriots instead of cavarly (They actually charge trough like cav is supposed to because they have so big turning rate and mass. And then they whitdraw like cav is supposed to because they have skrimishing option.)

4. They still haven't solved the issue of having to fight meaningless battles you really don't want to be bothered with.

Autoresolve works now. It doesnt pull you an upset by suprise so often and it warns about it when its about to.

5. The graphics are better but not at all optimized for any sort of computer setup.

They are better ye. I do get some lags on them but not by rule; It seems to be somewhat random. In 3vs3 PvP there is however quite a lot of lags. (Mayby the hosts need to be 3 times what they are now.)

My question would be, am I right... And can wait until I get it for free from some friend who got overly over the game quite fast...? Or have CA actually embraced this millenium for once?

I wouldnt count on getting one from friend free. These days it seems that expansions come as halfprice games that need the original. And I dont know about the others but IMO; Original RTW was shit, it was the BI that was the bomb... So I be clicking away this one untill that one comes. And I'm sure there will be lots of factions for sale in steam meanwhile. (Mayby even some I would like to play.)

[easytarget]

Well, unless he loves the period. If not I would pass too as all you will see are the negatives.

It's not like they aren't slapping you in the face with a large trout at every turn.

[Myth]

Guys as a fellow player i'd ask you to stop parroting stuff you've heard/read 3 weeks ago. The battles are not way too fast. Heck, they're slower than I'd like now even, if elite units are involved. Massive slugfests can and will happen between heavy infantry. Patch 3 really imroved that aspect. The AI on the campaign map is not a pushover especially if you let it blob.

It "sniffs" as soon as you disband units and start being weker than it. Also when you get yourself into multiple simoltaneous wars, then other factions will came to take a bite off you because they know you have your hands full.

If you are not playing patch 3 on Legendary, then you have no right to criticize how the game is too easy or too fast

[ShadesPanther]

Guys as a fellow player i'd ask you to stop parroting stuff you've heard/read 3 weeks ago. The battles are not way too fast. Heck, they're slower than I'd like now even, if elite units are involved. Massive slugfests can and will happen between heavy infantry. Patch 3 really imroved that aspect. The AI on the campaign map is not a pushover especially if you let it blob.

It "sniffs" as soon as you disband units and start being weker than it. Also when you get yourself into multiple simoltaneous wars, then other factions will came to take a bite off you because they know you have your hands full.

If you are not playing patch 3 on Legendary, then you have no right to criticize how the game is too easy or too fast

I agree. Patch 3 makes a huge improvement to the game. Especially to the AI. Battles can take quite some time now (especially bridge battles and sieges). To me its about the same now as previous titles.

The AI loves to dog pile if it spots weakness (its the same in ckII) in one game as Carthage I was fighting a stalemate war against Rome and Sparta in sicily and southern italy. I was also at war with garamantia and nasamones by libya was dealing with it. Then all of a sudden all the Iberians dow me and i lose spain and western north africa. I was able to stabalise things but the wars went on for a long time.

By far my most fun and challenging campaign yet.

[easytarget]

If you are not playing patch 3 on Legendary, then you have no right to criticize how the game is too easy or too fast

I don't follow what your point is here. That there is no range of difficulty? That is has to be played on legendary to be taken seriously? Surely that's not the point you're trying to make here.

As for comments I'm making in this forum about Rome 2, all based on personal experience.

[Hooahguy]

While I think its fair to say that you cant really be ever expecting a serious challenge on anything lower than hard, it also not right to say that someone cant say that the game goes too fast or the like either. Although if you are playing on easy, you dug your own grave.

[Myth]

I don't follow what your point is here. That there is no range of difficulty? That is has to be played on legendary to be taken seriously? Surely that's not the point you're trying to make here.

As for comments I'm making in this forum about Rome 2, all based on personal experience.

We're having this same discussion in another thread. My point is exactly this. If you're a newbie or if you're 11 years old and your mom just bought you the game, you should play on Easy. If you are the type of person who wants a challenge then go for Legendary or a little lower if you can't handle it yet.

If you haven't lead at least 15 battles under Patch 3 you are not qualified to say that they are too fast. They WERE too fast, that was one of my gripes about RII at release day. A unit of Roman generals bodyguard I charged at some random spearchuckers got shredded before they reached them. Cav vs. javelins - the cav dies. But that was under 1.00

Now the battles are great, and they can go fast only if you chain rout the AI, and that can happen with low tier units (and it's supposed to happen like that).

[Sp4]

For me the AI still only builds low tier units with the occasional good stuff thrown in and I don't even have any mods installed. Maybe that's what I'm doing wrong.

[Myth]

Depends. 1 settlement barbarians mass slingers and some melee, but if you leave Syracuse to its own devices it will take the Africa province and start spamming heavy hoplites. Sparta early on will keep devastating stacks, and if it ever grabs enough land I assure you it will be a problem.

Macedon also makes quality stacks - pikes, companiions etc. A 2 settlement Gaulish tribe last night surprised me by conjuring up almost 4 full stacks that had sword infantry mixed in, as well as some cavalry. Early on that's more than you can handle with one stack unless you got to Oathsworn, but that was around turn 16-20 for me.

[Sp4]

I didn't get them that early. In fact, I never reasearched the tech for them. I captured a town somewhere that had a high enough smith for me to recruit Oathsworn.

Syracuse can be annoying, especially early on, they seem to be programmed to amass a ridiculous army and then sit around, which they do fairly well. I guess the reason Sparta and Macedon are so dangerous is because of their pike/phalanx spam and its high defensive values. They can make most other infantry tire themselves out and eventually die to them, even if it takes ages. I've had some battle against Athens I think or Rhodes, where there was a unit of failry veteran and well upgraded (although not for attack) Evocati or Eagle Cohort fight against a unit of early game more or less standard hoplites and by the time the battle was over, they were still hitting away at each other with 40 dead between them XD

[Myth]

Heh, yeah. Syracuse sits around but it depends. If you're in good relations wtih them as Rome, they won't step on your toes. Most of the time they are at war with Carthage. In my second start as Rome I saw them take the other settlement in Sicilly. With two settlements they went into conquest mode or something, and just stomped Carthage and Libya. It was then I decided that I have to kill them now and quickly, before all that grain they got gives them food to support 6 stacks of hoplites, as that would make them basically a superpower.

If Sparta ever manages to get Egypt or Africa (food/grain provinces) I'm positive it will become a monster. If there was the option to gift settlements I would go and babysit them with Macedon or Athens and keep them as my allies, just to see if they can pain the map their colour.

[Shaitan]

...
If Sparta ever manages to get Egypt or Africa (food/grain provinces) I'm positive it will become a monster. If there was the option to gift settlements I would go and babysit them with Macedon or Athens and keep them as my allies, just to see if they can pain the map their colour.

I miss the feature of demanding and offering settlements from M2TW.

[Bramborough]

Biggest problem with Sparta as an AI faction is not just its one-city start, but it's landlocked one-city start, bordering on only one other region - Athens. Even if/when it expands, they can never trace a trade route back to capital. This obviously sorely gimps their income, as they can't ever get trade going. Apparently AI Sparta will gladly war on neighbors (those small Illyrian factions)...but never Athens (and vice versa).

[Sp4]

In my last campaign Sparta ended up owning Athens but that was only after this Odry something Kingdom faction stomped all over Macedon and Athens and then ended up in a war with Sparta on one side and me further North. As a result, Sparta went and captured Athens from them.

[edyzmedieval]

I was thinking the same about purchasing R2TW - it is a sure purchase from my part, since I'm a long time fan of TW games, and they will patch it up to make sure it's up to scratch.

It depends whether you want to play it now or later.