Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Really Appreciate CA Revisiting Rome II, But A Few Things Could Still Use Attention

SubjectEighteenSubjectEighteen Posts: 88Registered Users
Hello all,

First I would like to start out by saying that CA has done a great job, in my opinion making the new faction rosters. The four newest factions feel fleshed out and well-rounded, plus they all have pretty good roster depth. That being said, there are two major things I would like to see touched upon if Rome II is going to continue getting content.

1. Please dear sweet Jesus fix the Balkans factions. Its laughable how badly these rosters are put together when compared to the newest DLC factions. I realize that this is likely not going to happen, but it would be extremely appreciated.

2. Some areas of the map still feel weirdly glued together to fit the province system. (Looking at you Numantia.) Not only do large portions of the map like Iberia feel relatively empty with giant one off regions like Numantia, other regions of the map have now been made weird by the addition of the newest DLC factions. North Africa, in particular the area that Massaesyli start in could use a few new towns. These regions are huge and almost entirely empty. There aren't even resources in most of them. On top of this, Nabatea's starting province now feels even weirder than it did with Jerusalem being the only city they don't start with. Move Jerusalem to its own province, and add a small town in the Sinai peninsula on the Red Sea coast.

I'm sure there are other regions that I haven't noticed yet, but these are the ones that really stuck out to me. I'm aware that this is all likely a pipe dream, but who knows, I never thought Rome II would get more content.

Comments

  • desertchampiondesertchampion Posts: 11Registered Users

    Hello all,

    First I would like to start out by saying that CA has done a great job, in my opinion making the new faction rosters. The four newest factions feel fleshed out and well-rounded, plus they all have pretty good roster depth. That being said, there are two major things I would like to see touched upon if Rome II is going to continue getting content.

    1. Please dear sweet Jesus fix the Balkans factions. Its laughable how badly these rosters are put together when compared to the newest DLC factions. I realize that this is likely not going to happen, but it would be extremely appreciated.


    I can't agree more to OP, about balkan factions' roster, especially Odrysian Kingdom. Their roster is so unfinished and feels very limited. They are recorded as brutal melee warriors, but only got 3 melee units (besides one of them is Dacian spearmen) . Here are my suggestions for OK:

    1) They at least 3-4 spear units which might be as Thracian spears (low-tier national unit replacing Dacian spearmen), Thracian armoured spearmen (mid tier medium armor spear unit) and Thracian Hoplites [which is a must, for they are heavily influenced by Hellenization, high-tier hoplite-formation defensive unit (new dlc fations got good quality hoplite units, thracians deserve more)]

    2) They need to have a pikemen unit might be named as Thracian pikemen (because of their close realation with macedonians and hellenic influence on their military)

    3) As they are exceled faction in melee fight, I think the need a mid to high-tier sword unit, might be named as Thracian Swordsmen or Noble swordsmen

    4) Some other people have talked about their historically accurate mounted bowmen. Perhaps they can be added to roster, too. But their lacking melee units should be higher priority for they have only Thracian warriors/nobles nothing else.

    Here are other threads that have very important ideas related to topic (esp. last one)

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/129757/odrysian-kingdom-unit-roster-in-serious-need-of-revamping
    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/144181/odrysian-kingdom-never-forget
    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/130499/everything-wrong-with-the-odrysian-kingdom-possible-solutions

    My other priority for roster improving is Carthage. They are veeeery important faction in that time period. But Numidian roster is much better than theirs. Last thing, Getae and Illyrian faction should get revamped
  • DariosDarios Senior Member Posts: 404Registered Users
    What's wrong with the Getae faction? I love their roster!
  • SubjectEighteenSubjectEighteen Posts: 88Registered Users
    The problem with the balkans factions is that they have a total of 15 units that make up their entire army, while even new factions like Nabatae have easily twice that. Most of the balkans factions are playable, but they have no depth, and have glaring omissions like Ardiaeian units with Sica swords, or Odrysian Hoplites or Pikemen, and the Getae have like what, one falx unit?

    These rosters just need some love is all. They were easily the least worked on of all the DLC factions.
  • DariosDarios Senior Member Posts: 404Registered Users
    The lack of sica wielding units is a glaring omission for the Daco-Thracian factions
  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 116Registered Users
    Hello all

    I will join with my opinion, definitely agree that CA has done a great job in both - desert factions /faction rosters and factions general/ and update the game, honestly I'm glad to support them trough buy DLC ..

    So whats needs to be improwed:

    1/ In the first place combat mechanics from Warhammer /and old Rome 1/ - units spacing and collision ,
    if you have Warhammer , compare chariots in battle in warhammer and in Rome II, another thing is combat AI does not know to use it in right way, same case with elephants, compare rome 2 elephants in battle and warhammer creatures, about units spacing - you can check mod "Rome Total War Classic Combat" on steam what im thinking, different barbarian infantry

    2/ fix naval combat & navy system in general,
    I would redesign transport system - you can board your armies only in ports, and it will by take 1 turn like in old total war games, better from game-play, realistic and historical view
    make marine crew for ships like in Attila, ships will have marines instead of hoplites or slingers and other units which do not belong to ships, there will be archer and sword marines in roman, carthagian, hellenic, barbarian, eastern /included desert factions/ variants

    3/ Carthago
    Carthage is core faction and is poorly design, you can choose only elephant and cavalery as General's unit, add sacred band as general unit, mayby Libyan Infantry too
    also needs add some more units, and reworked mercenary system - for example light barracks chain would provide mercenary with similar areal mechanics as roman Auxiliarys
    In Carthage would be unique port building "Cothon" - like Saba's dam in Marib
    I would probably give Thapsus city from Libya to Carthage

    4/ Balkan factions
    Celtic Tylis is OK, Getae /Dacia/ needs better falxmen in late game, about Odrysian Kingdom wrote @desertchampion , honestly I think , in present state, the Odrysian kingdom is almost unplayable in single player campaign, I will add swordsmen and thracian hoplites, late hellenic peltasts , and probably more units
    Ardiaei not sure, that should be navy focused pirate faction, they can use navy instead of army for conquer ports

    5/ Nomadic DLC factions victory conditions
    All 3 nomadic factions have same victoty conditions, need to be meaningful rewrite

    6/ Rome
    Cornelia's -50% upkeep cost for all auxiliary units bonus is overpowered, reduce too -25%

    7/ DLC units
    Add Kush Shieldwomen from daughters of Mars to Kush
    Add Scorpion Pot Ballista from beasts of war to Armenia, Nabatea, Kush and Masaesyli



  • MarcusIuniusBrutusMarcusIuniusBrutus Senior Member GermanyPosts: 1,708Registered Users
    edited March 13
    Rome II combat mechanics are fine and need no rework.

    Rome I and Warhammer combat mechanics are complete unrealistic. Elephants and Chariots were useless in reality and come quickly out of use in roman times. Especially chariots and elephants are not living cars, which can easily be driven.

    Simply no.

    Play WH and RTW, if you prefer this battles. I do not. RTW was horrible unrealistic and bad.
  • WalrusWalrus Senior Member BrazilPosts: 1,090Registered Users

    Rome II combat mechanics are fine and need no rework.

    Rome I and Warhammer combat mechanics are complete unrealistic. Elephants and Chariots were useless in reality and come quickly out of use in roman times. Especially chariots and elephants are not living cars, which can easily be driven.

    Simply no.

    Play WH and RTW, if you prefer this battles. I do not. RTW was horrible unrealistic and bad.

    An elephant is still an elephant.
  • slapnut1207slapnut1207 Posts: 569Registered Users

    Rome II combat mechanics are fine and need no rework.

    Rome I and Warhammer combat mechanics are complete unrealistic. Elephants and Chariots were useless in reality and come quickly out of use in roman times. Especially chariots and elephants are not living cars, which can easily be driven.

    Simply no.

    Play WH and RTW, if you prefer this battles. I do not. RTW was horrible unrealistic and bad.

    Elephants aren't useless, they could scare the enemy and cause casualties on enemies as well.
    My completed (including campaigns that I consider completed) Campaigns:
    Rome 2:
    Gallic Roman Empire
    Seleucid Empire
    Aurelian's Roman Empire
    Attila:
    Eastern Roman Empire

  • MarcusIuniusBrutusMarcusIuniusBrutus Senior Member GermanyPosts: 1,708Registered Users
    edited March 13
    Zama was a disaster for Carthage using elephants, also Magnesia for Antiochus. Elephants are fine now. I don't want Elefant tanks on 4 legs back like it was at release.
  • Jedidias1Jedidias1 Posts: 39Registered Users
    edited March 13
    I agree with Karoten2 about Carthage, under the AI it is not a challenge, and about fixing the naval combat & navy system in general

    3 things I really recommend to CA about Rome 2 are:

    1-Improve garrisons in fortress, It would improve the game a lot making siege battles more challenging and fun)

    2-Improve battle and Campaign AI (make it more smart and don´t just give it bonuses)

    3-rework landing ships like in Attila.

  • slapnut1207slapnut1207 Posts: 569Registered Users

    Zama was a disaster for Carthage using elephants, also Magnesia for Antiochus. Elephants are fine now. I don't want Elefant tanks on 4 legs back like it was at release.

    Still really effective for intimidation.
    My completed (including campaigns that I consider completed) Campaigns:
    Rome 2:
    Gallic Roman Empire
    Seleucid Empire
    Aurelian's Roman Empire
    Attila:
    Eastern Roman Empire

  • MarcusIuniusBrutusMarcusIuniusBrutus Senior Member GermanyPosts: 1,708Registered Users
    Elephants are still useful enough in Rome II and need no rework.

  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 116Registered Users

    Rome II combat mechanics are fine and need no rework.

    Rome I and Warhammer combat mechanics are complete unrealistic. Elephants and Chariots were useless in reality and come quickly out of use in roman times. Especially chariots and elephants are not living cars, which can easily be driven.

    Simply no.

    Play WH and RTW, if you prefer this battles. I do not. RTW was horrible unrealistic and bad.

    Wait a moment..
    Of course Warhammer combat mechanics are DAMMIT unrealistic, there can not be any word about realism :D and Rome I are far from perfect, but Im talking especially about units collision,, how the single units react in combat, units spacing /gaps between soldiers/you can check video on youtube "Why Rome 2 Failed"

    I'm thinking, we are not understand ourself, Im not speaking about realism

    And lets check batlle between 2 Ai Army /one your ally and one enemy/ without joining the battle, how they use elephants and chariots

  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 116Registered Users

    Elephants are still useful enough in Rome II and need no rework.

    Really my friend... take one minute and check this youtube video "Sane Critique, Why Rome 2 Failed" from time 25:47
    That is state of Rome II in 2013, but basic collision problem stays,
  • MarcusIuniusBrutusMarcusIuniusBrutus Senior Member GermanyPosts: 1,708Registered Users
    edited March 16
    For me combat is fine in Rome II and i´ve enjoyed the game 3356 hours now. In my opinion combat need no rework and i don´t care about the old known YT-Videos.

    I don´t want to play the game with a "Classic Rome Total War Battle Overhaul".

    And for me the charge and damage of the RTW- Elephants before 25:47 is complete unrealistic.
    Post edited by MarcusIuniusBrutus on
  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 116Registered Users
    And what do you honestly think about elephants charge after 25:47?? - rome 2 charge

    MarcusIuniusBrutus, did you play other Total war games?
  • MarcusIuniusBrutusMarcusIuniusBrutus Senior Member GermanyPosts: 1,708Registered Users
    edited March 16
    Yeah i played RTW and its battle mechanics are simple unrealistic and inferior. And when i played Rome Total War, i was already 30 years old and old enough to know, that battles in RTW were not realistic, because i had read books about ancient battles since i was 12 years old.

    You want Lord of the Ring Charges, i want realism. No need to discuss further.
  • Karoten2Karoten2 Posts: 116Registered Users
    MarcusIuniusBrutus
    All right, dude, old enough to know.

    You totally missed what I want, and now I see, Its pointless to speak with you.
    Please forget my post, and think how realistic are Rome II battles

    Carpe diem ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.