I just don't agree.You have to remember that the taking of Taras, IRL, was a large stroke of luck for the romans, mostly caused by Pyhrros's, completly unrelated, death. Therefore, in game, the Epirotes are very much a rissing power, and it makes a certain sense for Roma to not wish for any more costly Pyhriric wars, and be content with a stalemate whilst they attack weaker and more disorganised foes.
Taras was on its knees before Pyrrhos arrived in 280, and it was quickly on its knees again when he departed Italy in 275. The fall of Taras was not a stroke of luck, but inevitable. Taras had a long history of sustaining its unsustainable position in Italy with external aid; as soon as that aid vanished, Taras succumbed.
Taras had been a noteworthy regional power during the time of Archytas (428-347), but by 272 it was enfeebled, it lacked significant military capability, and had a total dependence upon both mercenaries and adventurers/saviours from both Epiros and Sparta.
That is why the fall of Taras to Rome was so un-noteworthy. The small Epirote garrison quietly evacuated, and Rome quietly assumed effective control.
Epiros was not a "rising power" in 272; it was a mere months away from vanishing from the Greek stage altogether as a regional power. The unique personality of Pyrrhos propelled this small, poor and heterogenous polity onto the international stage during 280-272. In his absence, it resumed its status as a 3rd rate Greek kingdom cum league.
So, by 272, the supremacy of Rome in Italy was a resolved question. All that remained to make it a fact was to eliminate a treacherous Roman/Campanian garrison at Rhegium and bring a crippled Taras to heel.
It was a foregone conclusion.
H.
Bookmarks