Re: State of the Game
I know this sounds silly but maybe its because you are Roman and thus everyone is supposed to hate you? I dont really know, Rome historically didnt get along too well with her neighbors, after all.
Unless you see the same thing with other factions as well, totally invalidating my point.
On the Path to the Streets of Gold: a Suebi AAR
Visited:
Hvil i fred HoreToreA man who casts no shadow has no soul.
Re: State of the Game
Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Playing Rome you are simply supposed to be hated by everyone on the map. I know that was certainly what happened in my CIG campaign, and by mid campaign everyone was sending stacks at me non stop.
I'm just going to stop with the diplo and focus on taking people out. Perhaps down the road opportunities will arise for diplo.
The only reason I've been talking about it for this long is because Slaisits and SP4 continue to post up remarks cracking me up, seemingly implying they've somehow magically figured diplo out. And the reason that's funny to me is because there's absolutely nothing about diplo or anything else in any TW game that is remotely complex enough to ever suggest it "requires figuring out". haha
Re: State of the Game
Sure as hell doesn't seem like you guys are playing the same game
I've never bothered much with diplomacy since the beginning and Shogun 1. I do have to admit that I'm a sucker for an ally that actually remains loyal, and I will do everything in my power to make sure they survive. The most extreme case I can remember is an alliance I had with Macedonia in RTW 1, playing as Armenia. It lasted for nearly 100yrs. even with a long common border. When the Romans started making an all out effort to eliminate them, I put my expansion on hold for several years in order to spank them back into place. The three provinces I 'rescued' from Roman rule, I gave to my long-standing ally fully expecting them to finally turn on me. To my astonishment, they proceeded to pick up where I left off and continue to run the Romans out of Greece.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I got a great deal of enjoyment out of that game simply because I had gotten an alliance that actually worked.
One reason I still love playing GalCiv 2 is because there are 4 ways to win a campaign....the usual kill everyone and sort it out later; a tech victory by accumulating a certain amount of technology points; an influence victory by having your political influence dominate a given % of the galaxy; and a diplo victory by having your alliance be the last races left (and this can be with multiple allies). Very satisfying to pull off a win without having to vaporize everything not flying your banner. I once won a campaign without fighting a single fleet engagement. I just kept feeding advanced starships to my two allies (though not my best designsI don't get it. If I'm to participate in the game through these systems by making choices, hopefully meaningful ones, I have to be allowed to do something, I can't get these guys to even talk to me.just in case they turned on me) and let them do all the fighting. When ever a planet went rebel, I moved my transports in to take over. I still consider that game to be the most enjoyable of all the GalCiv games I've ever played.........
Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 07-03-2014 at 05:11.
High Plains Drifter
Re: State of the Game
@easytarget with Rome one minor mistake in the first 5 turns can lead to chain DoWs or to smooth sailing into NAP land.
On turn 1 Athens and Sparta don't care much for you, but they don't hate you either. If you ever start a scrap with Epirus however, they will like you more. Trade with Athens is possible as soon as you upgrade 3 resource minor settlements to tier 2. Once you trade with Athens, you can NAP Sparta (you must have a full legion by now). Once you NAP Sparta, you can NAP Athens. It's a snowball effect.
If you disband any units on turn 1 before recruiting more, you might just get chain DoWed by both of them.
The art of war, then, is governed by five constant
factors, to be taken into account in one's deliberations,
when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
These are: (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth;
(4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"
Like totalwar.org on Facebook!
Re: State of the Game
Yeah, I think you and Slaists have hit on the problem, part of it was right off what I tend to do is get the peninsula under control and get rid of the Etruscans. This was not some mad expansion, I took maybe 2 or 3 provinces, but between that and starting out as Junia everyone hates me. And to that I can only say, so be it.Originally Posted by Myth
This will cause my initial expansion to be slower because I'm being slowed down by a lack of funds. I've had to rethink taking Carthage out because I've had to keep an eye on the Greeks and the guys they are allied with, I barely survived a wave of them coming at me. I'm not much of a fan of the way combat works in this game I'm not going to lie, I like MTW2 a lot better and even Shogun 2 better. The whole feel of battle is all wrong for me. Again, whatever. I'm just in this to see what I make of the current state of Rome 2 after 13 patches, and I've got to say I like it better than when it initially launched that's for sure. But I'm also 100% confident I will never like it as much as MTW2 or S2, the unit mix and magic button business so annoys me there will never be a fix for that.
Re: State of the Game
Just forget that magic button exists. I never (almost) use it.
As to unit mix. Probably what bugs me most at this point with patches is how vulnerable to frontal missile attacks they have made pikes. I don't think we can find a historical reference to pike phalanxes being destroyed by ancient missile fire from the front. Come to think of it, Alexander was facing numerically superior Persian armies filled with missile types and we know who came up on the top. If you ask me, pikes should be vulnerable to attacks (missile and melee) from flanks and the rear, not the front.
In the current state, pikes are probably the most useless use of a slot in the whole roster of Hellenic factions...
Having said that, after since the latest missile nerf, pikes are probably the only kills AI missile units get... Pikes and cavalry, LOL...
Last edited by Slaists; 07-07-2014 at 16:10.
Re: State of the Game
Yep, I've seen victory conditions and diplo done better, no surprise that. GalCiv was well done on that front. And funny, come to think of it, your example of winning by feeding allies units is something I've often done in Civ V with the introduction of those little client states they scattered all over the map. That was a very cool way to help keep another power in check w/o directly going to war with them, used to feed them units and money to wage a war by proxy.One reason I still love playing GalCiv 2 is because there are 4 ways to win a campaign....the usual kill everyone and sort it out later; a tech victory by accumulating a certain amount of technology points; an influence victory by having your political influence dominate a given % of the galaxy; and a diplo victory by having your alliance be the last races left (and this can be with multiple allies). Very satisfying to pull off a win without having to vaporize everything not flying your banner. I once won a campaign without fighting a single fleet engagement. I just kept feeding advanced starships to my two allies (though not my best designs
Would be cool if in R2 diplo if I could give units to allies and certainly it would be nice to give them settlements.
Re: State of the Game
While I'm not at any point claiming to have "figured out" anything magical about TW diplo [or anything TW related], here is my legendary Junia campaign, turn 11, vanilla game, legendary difficulty, patch 13.1.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
and this is a few turns later:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
;)
Last edited by Slaists; 07-09-2014 at 05:46.
Re: State of the Game
Look what I have somehow done =S I don't think I figured anything out, I just broke it to the point where there are two factions with the same name.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Re: State of the Game
Guys the name of this game is Total War. Not Total Hugs.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
The art of war, then, is governed by five constant
factors, to be taken into account in one's deliberations,
when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
These are: (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth;
(4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"
Like totalwar.org on Facebook!
Re: State of the Game
It didn't last terribly long. Literally 2 turns after I took that screenshot, the Nori decided to declare war on Trapezos, because they'd sent an army all the way through my land there. I was then left with two choices... Throw Nori out of my napfest or support them and declare war on everything that has a name south of where I am currently sitting. I decided to throw the Nori out and sent two armies to take their two regions they owned only because I liberated them some century ago.
How does this stuff happen. I'm friends, or at least used to be friends with a lot of celtic and gaul tribes (I think they're the same in the game actually, not sure at the moment, you can tell, I hardly ever play them). That was because at some point, after I had taken all of Macedon, Thrace and Hellas (I did most of this through the use of agents and inciting revolts rather than direct declaration of war, which meant that the rest of the Greek world didn't mind that I was taking over Athens and Macedon. Macedon was worn down in a war with the Tylis and the Odrysian Kingdom, so by the time I turned to Thrace, Macedon just lost Pella. Athens sailed over to make war with Bythnia and the Galatians, so I sat there with an army in Sparta and 2 Spies and 4 turns later, Athens fell to a revolt, which I then destroyed and took over the city)
...the Suebi declared war on me and they had mopped up most of the little tribes and were sitting in Cisalpina being all grrrrr civilisation. Since I had no interest in actually going that way and conquering Germanic and Celtic Europe, I just marched some armies there, defeated some Germans and liberated every tribe I came across before heading back and letting them have at it again. (This war against the Suebi also gave me pretty good relations with the Averni because they were at war with them too and we sort of attacked them from two directions and met up in Hercynia, where I decided to turn around and go on doing what I actually wanted to do.
During my whole campaign, I have tried hard to single out enemies, get them to a point where I don't have to declare war on them or when I do, I don't end up being drawn into a war with 7 different allies. The Seleucids are annoying in this regard because they like pretty much everyone I've been at war with since starting to head east. A war with them, I was trying really hard to avoid though I probably should not have because they overran Egypt and are probably sitting there now. I was able to take apart a few of their satrapies without declaring war on the Seleucids directly by dragging them into defensive wars which the overlord for some diplomatically logical and somewhat broken reason doesn't join automatically.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I am not playing Rome Total Hugs, I am playing Rome Total Break The AI Where Possible.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Last edited by Sp4; 07-09-2014 at 15:06.
Re: State of the Game
More from Rome Total Hugs (Ardiaei, legendary, game version 13.1, vanilla, 260 BC):
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Last edited by Slaists; 07-10-2014 at 14:05.
Re: State of the Game
He is not only playing as Rome; he is playing as Junia. Junia get a global diplo malus with all factions. The other two Roman factions are much easier (at least diplomacy wise). Cornelia even get a boost to relationships with Greeks.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks