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

The official constructive criticism thread

2456713

Comments

  • KuatKuat Member Posts: 87Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Please make new User Interface:

    - redesign the silly "card style" graphics
    - make full screen city management
    - make full screen tech research with visible trees
    - just make everything full screen - that little box on the bottom sucks
  • CloverClover Senior Member Posts: 4,964Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    How can it be "official" when it's not from CA? :P
    (\_/)
    (O.o)
    (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
  • BwenGunBwenGun Junior Member Posts: 1Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    robin2852 wrote: »
    My major bugbear at the moment, avoiding technical issues, is that the Campaign AI seems so hostile to any diplomacy. I just started a new save as Suebi, and i'm having a fun time. I have three clans around me that have a friendly attitude towards me, with a 50+ rating. However, none of them will even sign a trade agreement unless i give them 5k.
    I had a similiar issue in my Pontus save, where, despite having absolutely beaten down Athens, and even captured Athens city, the faction just wouldn't sign a peace treaty with even the most generous conditions.

    The campaign AI definitely needs tweaking.

    I am must concur, the inability to start trade routes without massive bribes and the fact that wars seem all but impossible to end, despite being far more powerful than the foe, through negotiation make the game a little frustrating, to say the least. It's especially irritating as the very low opinion the AI has also makes conquering a settlement and making them a client state leads (thus far at least) to them revolting in only a few turns and declaring war. Because all the old modifiers to the relations between nations aren't wiped clean after subjugation, or even reduced in any real way.
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    Clover wrote: »
    How can it be "official" when it's not from CA? :P

    Because I am Epic.

    OK, not really. I just wanted to give people a thread that wasn't full of hyperbole and silly things. Im not saying other people's topics are not important or useful of course, just that it sort of gets lost in the White Noise about refunds, fraud, metacritic.

    ....and feel that CA as a business will respond more positively to us if we coherently and maturely get our point of view across. I also hoped they might get a bit mad at me for calling it "official" and at least then read it! (Juvenile, moi?)

    :) Thanks for all of your great input!
    Goodbye
  • cheifTencheifTen Junior Member Posts: 12Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    In my opinion the phalanxes are pretty ****ty due to the lack of guard mode.
  • Ichigo1ukIchigo1uk Junior Member Posts: 5Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    I think i like that game after the first 10 hours but I'll list stuff that really annoys me or gets in the way. Most of these points will be in comparison to shogun 2 which is currently the best handling game in terms of UI, Information and the campaign map at least.

    - The UI -

    It's designed for tablet users... The minimalistic UI gets in the way and hides information from you that'd be easily seen in shogun 2.

    The UI is also terribly scaled for when more then 20 units are on the field and the 2nd layer appears on top covering 1/3 of the screen. (@1080p)

    This applies to the Diplomacy map aswell which was simpler in Shogun. (Also WASD not working in diplomacy is just silly, I have to click on the map and move the mouse which is exactly what a tablet user does with there finger, Except i'm playing on a PC.)

    By Minimalising the UI they just complicated everything that uses it.

    I also think the upgrading of the towns/cities was easier in Shogun and that to see all of the towns in the province should of been a 2nd tab in the "Town Details" screen from shogun 2.

    -The Battles -

    Abilities, Magic Abilities everywhere.
    Now i'm not opposed to morale buffing from when a general is near, nor the inspire from shogun 2 as long as the reloads are spaced, there not completely unrealisitic as the men will fight for there general.

    What I am opposed to is abilities similar to "Draco" that makes the Roman Equites immortal to spear or pike infantry for a rediculously long time at that from frontal charges. Now i'm all for Gandalf leading my Roman Cav charges but if he's also using magic to boot it makes no sense from a historical or gameplay perspective.

    Unit formations is what matters for tactical play, the number and absurdity of some of these abilities is redonkulous.

    - The Unit's themselves - (Not a actual problem just something I'm not used to)

    Now this may just be me, but the fact that a unit can have up to 6 different main colours within the 160 men leads to a somewhat weird colour displays and you lose that sense of "This is my army". Now i know some of the units retain at least a 2 colour scheme later in the game, and the barbarian's seem exempt from this in my experiance...

    I realise also that historically at this time, the roman's at least would buy there own gear for war and so some may have been yellow rather then the nice red we're used to.
    But you can't use History as an excuse when you put in abilities like "Draco" that make no sense.



    Now there are probably a few gripes I'm missing, not including the AI which will never be fully competitant but certainly could of been hell of alot better.
    But my 20 minutes are up, fin.
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    cheifTen wrote: »
    In my opinion the phalanxes are pretty ****ty due to the lack of guard mode.

    Mentioned above I think but yes I totally agree. Guard mode is a must.
    Goodbye
  • LittlekinksLittlekinks Junior Member Posts: 4Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Below is a list of things that I consider most irritating which I would like to feedback.

    1. Please re-balance garrison forces. At present, it is entirely possible for a single decent melee unit to wreck the entire (level 1-2) garrison forces on their own. 14 losses to 1024 kills style. It simply makes attacking cities and towns far too easy. Even when forces are relatively even in numbers the chance of victory is 'Very High'. Besieging is a big part of the game, it is a shame is presents no challenge.

    2. Please either reintroduce the 'Guard Mode' and make units chase down fleeing enemies or make a 'Slaughter Them!' stance, so that my men don't stand around cheering because they killed some plebs whilst the entire enemy force charges in!

    3. Slow it all down. Units simply race across the field. This problem was fixed by Darthmod for Shogun, but there is no reason why you guys can't change it instead. Battles are over in a blink.

    4. Please restore the Battle Unit Screen to its original Shogun 2 glory. It is so big its absurd. I either have to see my unit cards or see the battle.

    5. Please restore the information on mouse-over. The new system attempts to be more intuitive, but I end up having to hold the mouse over.

    6. Make the morale system less make or break. It seems to me a unit is either steadfast. Or shattered. Either the units need to have gradual decrease in moral (unless blindingly obvious they would flee - I'm thinking plebs vs elephants.) or they need a lower threshold for shatter. I haven't needed to rally anything...well ever. Because I can't.

    7. Reduce mul.....t...i...player turn time. It is absurdly long.

    8. Improve campaign map auto-pathing when cross embarking on boats. Units seem to go miles to the coast rather than using ports.

    Thats kind of it for now.

    So far, a brilliant game. With some polish, it'll be a masterpiece! Keep up the good work!
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    thanks little kinks, that is a solid list. Appreciate the input.
    Goodbye
  • NerzanaNerzana Junior Member Posts: 7Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Kuat wrote: »
    Please make new User Interface:

    - redesign the silly "card style" graphics
    - make full screen city management
    - make full screen tech research with visible trees
    - just make everything full screen - that little box on the bottom sucks

    I disagree with you about most of the full screen except city management. The "little"box is HUGE in my screen
  • florinsflorins Senior Member Posts: 205Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    This thread is pretty cool. I would also add one thing, as most of my concerns have been already touched by other posters:

    - The ability to have multiple commanders in a stack or to besiege cities
  • BrianstormBrianstorm Junior Member Posts: 4Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Posted this elsewhere, but I'll paste it in here too for what it's worth. hopefully a dev will read it:

    1. get rid of capture the flag on non-siege battles. I'm defending, in hills. Julius Caesar would place himself on the hilltop. The computer plants my flag down in the valley where my army spawned - I mean that IS really really annoying.

    2. Unit tiredness doesn't seem to feature anymore in battles. I've moused over units and just can't read it anywhere. This is vital information for any general - how do I know who needs reinforcing or which enemies to fire range weapons at to get them to rout? I've a nasty feeling its disappeared completely from the game.

    3. Battle speed and tiredness. I've had attacking swordsmen units charge up a very steep hill to attack my position, and have only managed to get one, possibly two rounds of ranged attacks on them - they seemed to be running as fast as they do on a plain.

    4. The help/ manual could be a lot better.

    A couple of minor gripes which are annoying only because they should have been picked up in testing before release.

    5. My Carthaginian general has an elephant bodyguard - on the unit card it says melee. In battle they're actually a ranged unit. I couldn't work that one out.
    6. When I level up my agents, the tool tips tell me what the traits will bring. When I level up my generals, I don't get that info - I need to go to the manual. Frustrating.

    Finally I'll add briefly what I think is great and they got right:
    1. Changes to public order system.
    2. I actually like the reduced army numbers (so far)- it requires greater planning on my part.
    3. Army traits - great.
    4. The campaign map is beautiful.
    5. Generally the campaign game feels much deeper than any TW game I've played before - multiple reasons for that - provinces, tech trees, public order and culture, limited means to transport your armies, the diplomacy system seems to sort of work (though I'm still not sure about that, haven't played long enough).

    Pretty much agree with all of this.
  • PatrickJSPatrickJS Member Posts: 30Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Fix the ENDLESS wait time during turns, Like really

    also the startup time is endless
  • drmaikatidrmaikati Senior Member Posts: 157Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Massive w8 time in singleplayer map..im posting this wile i w8 for my turn..also i did watch few little kittens playing under my window
  • Pinkerton00Pinkerton00 Senior Member Posts: 471Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Tornadium wrote: »
    1. Implement the cut content, Faction Selection screen and Full Carthage Siege to begin with
    The detail of the Carthage siege depends on the level of the main settlement building in the city. If you notice, even on low levels of the building, the correct coastline is in place. The walls expand and the awesome port gets added with higher levels of that building.
    1. Unoptimized POS / performance issues
    2. Battle speed is ridiculous
    3. Battles are blobs
    4. No tactics
    5. Unnecessary abilities like "the whip" or "draco", only adding to the micromanagement.
    A lot of people are getting fine performance. I, for instance, am doing great on all extreme/ultra settings.
    Battle speed depends greatly on the forces in play. If it's an army of heavy roman units vs an early barbarian army, it goes fast as hell, yeah, but if you're up against a large greek or carthage army in the early game, it can take a while.
    I'm finding tactics pretty useful, but you have to remember. The tactics of the day were pretty much throw skirmishers at them, charge line, watch flanks, cav charge, next battle please.
    On some level, I agree with people on the micromanagement "magic" abilities, but on the other hand, I kind of like them. It's a cool limitation that you can take a cavalry unit, charge with draco, get a huge full effect, but then you can't just get that full effect EVERY time you charge with that unit since the ability has to go on cd. It kinda makes sense when you think of it that way.
    Battle UI unit cards are massive and in the way. Also the click and drag feature is clunky and works 50% of the time for me at best.
    The unit cards are pretty massive, but I have two things to say about that: It makes it easier to click on them and harder to confuse one unit type for another (also an advantage of the stylized art on them). Also, you can toggle the whole window on or off. the 'i' key is default for that. 'o' key for the minimap. I find myself toggling that frame pretty frequently in battle.

    Still, I have one big complaint about controls and such. The game does not register clicks very well. I sometimes double right-click and enemy like 4 times and the game will think i'm giving a simple move order. Finally (sometimes as late as the 4th or 5th try) it will finally go "OH! You want me to ATTACK those guys!"
    2. Unit tiredness doesn't seem to feature anymore in battles. I've moused over units and just can't read it anywhere. This is vital information for any general - how do I know who needs reinforcing or which enemies to fire range weapons at to get them to rout? I've a nasty feeling its disappeared completely from the game.
    Unit fatigue is still there. I'm not sure how to get it to show up in writing, but I've seen it in game. It's usually indicated now by the colored running legs when you mouse over the unit. Green means fresh, red means exhausted. And there are inbetweens there, too.
  • hon3ynutshon3ynuts Senior Member Posts: 331Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Unit variety isn't what i hoped for. Yes there are many units with different names, but a only guys with swords and shields or spears with shields isn't really "variety"(only 2 cheap ~400$ axmen units in game have good ap and club units function same as Swordsmen). There are no units Good vs armor except mabye Javlinmen and the 2 poor quality axman units? There's no 2 handed weapons in the entire game. And Most missile units are differentiated soley by rate of fire and weapon type. With minimal other differences

    I just want lots of different weapons and weapon types, each with a unique purpose or advantage. Most are just cheap or expensive, good or bad, not really unique or interesting.
  • ElicasElicas Senior Member Posts: 218Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Mostly I can just add agreements for;

    *Magical abilities.
    *Phalanxes being ****ty.
    I played Epirus first. First fight against Sparta, lined my Phalanxes up, all ready to give them a kicking. The Spartans charged headlong with swords straight through my pike/spear line and slaughtered my Phalanxes. In a straight up head to head fight. WTF is up with that?
    *Magical abilities.
    *Campaign Turn time is ridiculous.
    *Suicidal battle AI, passive campaign AI.
    *Magical abilities.
    *AI still insists on having 3 stacks of 2-3 units instead of 1 stack of 10. I though the army limit was supposed to reduce the amount of small ineffective armies you had to fight. I'm sure the 100+ factions all moving 3 minor armies per turn is extensively adding to the AI turn time.
    *Magical abilities.
    *Capture points in open battles, WTF is that **** doing in a strategy game?
    *Battle time is several times too fast.

    I'll add a few criticisms of my own now.

    *If you can't fix the AI turn time, give us more to do per turn. Waiting 1-2mins to click 'end turn' because you're building up armies for war is insane.
    *Increase the armour/shield/melee defense of each unit. Morale can stay the same, or perhaps even be lowered so units break at 20%-30% casualties, as a unit fleeing when less than half it's number dies is relatively accurate for the period (Historically, most men killed in battle were ridden down by light cavalry after they had broken, typically only 5%-10% of an army would actually die in battle). The issue is that men die too quickly, thus units break within a minute of engaging in combat.
    *Remove all special abilities from the game except Inspire. What the **** type of historical game is this when you start putting in magical one shot wonder weapons? The couple of MP games I've seen revolves round one souped up fully upgraded super unit of infantry, charge, warcry, mass rout, match done in under 2 minutes. SP it's even worse, as the AI is too stupid to react to you using abilities. Remove, remove, remove.
    *Give us the options to set different graphics settings for the campaign map and the battle map. My PC can run the battles on high, but comes to a crawl on the campaign map. It's 2013, why the **** can't we have such a simple menu choice? This should have been thought of months ago in development.

    Oh, and just once more in case my hatred of it hasn't come through well enough. Get rid of the ******g ****ty magical ******g abilities.
  • Pinkerton00Pinkerton00 Senior Member Posts: 471Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Honestly, most of the changes I either like (the uni cards, limited armies) or ambivalent about (magic abilities).
    My biggest complaints are about the diplomacy. Even on normal campaign difficulty, it is impossible to secure alliances. As Rome, I had a positive standing with both Sparta and Athens. Diplomatic relations nearing 100. Still, they refused to do anything beyond a non-aggression pact. And I was really confused because a barbarian faction that I had never encountered but had declared war against just to secure a non-aggression pact from a neighboring barbarian faction begged me for peace and offered to become my client state. I'm not sure if that's broken, but I was confused by it. I'd never even marched on them.
    Worst of all, though, is that relations diminish so fast! You'll make a trade agreement with someone and 5 turns later, they'll be like "nope, we don't want your **** anymore". You'll look, and for no reason, your relations with them are almost back in the negative again because the good things you did are now too far in the past. How are you supposed to maintain trade agreements with nations that aren't constantly in wars for you to help them with?
    Oh, and it's cool that smaller nations have a chance, and I can understand the iceni or suebi disappearing (suebi are kicking a** in my campaign, though. It's annoying.) But in my campaign, in Lusty Jack's Macedon campaign, and in other peoples' as well, it seems like Carthage just gets their pretentious traders' behinds handed to them within like 20 or 30 turns. I think it's because they're so spread out to start. Makes for a difficult player campaign as carthage, which is cool, but I think for the AI's sake, you should give them some more of Carthago Nova's starting regions.
  • ThePurplePeopleThePurplePeople Senior Member Posts: 162Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    PatrickJS wrote: »
    Fix the ENDLESS wait time during turns, Like really

    also the startup time is endless


    It's not endless at all.
  • A_Parked_CarA_Parked_Car Member Posts: 85Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. Serious performance issues. The optimization is terrible and the FPS drops for doing something like clicking on a freaking army on the campaign map is quite frustrating. Empire may have been awful at launch, but at least when I could get it to run without crashing I didn't get a slideshow presentation. This seems like one big optimization patch away from being fixed. Hopefully.

    2. The UI is not very good at all. I have 'gotten used to it', the problem being that it isn't nearly as intuitive as Shogun 2's was. A lot of information is either obtuse or entirely absent. I'm not afraid of change, since I thought that the UI in every new Total War was far superior to the preceeding game, especially the horribly-dated nightmare that was Rome 1's UI. This particular cancer is here to stay unfortunately.

    3. The battle speed is far too fast. I can't gain any enjoyment out of them at all, the game seems to get really excited and 'blow its load' in about five minutes every battle. In shogun 2 I never really got the chance to zoom in and enjoy anything. In Rome 2 I don't even have time to maneuver before the enemy's army, who must be made up of clones of the Flash, have ran up to mine and blobbed into it. Morale, running speed and kill-rates all seem geared to make battles mind-blowingly fast.

    Now some minor nitpicks:

    4. Where did guard mode go and why were extremely useful abilities like it replaced by horribly video-gamey 'fight-better' and 'make enemy run in .5 seconds' buttons.

    5. Why don't my Romans throw their pila if the enemy is charging at them?

    6. I played a defense map and being the silly tactician I am I decided to shift my army to some nearby high-ground. I was out-numbered (though not overwhelmingly so) and thought that was just the edge I needed. I gleefully waited for the enemy to march up to me (which only took about 20 seconds because of the silly battle speed) only to realize the enemy just captured the video-game point down in some horrible terrain that no sane person would attempt to defend. Battle over.

    Now, my army was in muster mode, so I'm willing to let that slide if it isn't in a regular defensive battle. It would give some downside to getting caught recruiting. I haven't fought a pure open-field defensive battle yet.
    "The historian without his facts is rootless and futile; the facts without their historian are dead and meaningless." - E. H. Carr

    "I'm not here to tell you all of the answers. Rather, I'm here to merely get you acquainted with the questions." (Speaking of the study of history.) - Dr. David C. Wright
  • wolverine101wolverine101 Senior Member Posts: 978Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. having to build platforms before actually building the building just wasted time and more micromanagement
    2. allow untis to move even if they build units in the field but not into a battle that would be exploiting.
    3. more tooltips instead of having to figure out the UI which is horrible.
    4. diplomacy list of nations willing to trade and or non-aggression pact with over 200 factions trying to get anything diplomatic could become tedious and boring every turn.
    5. I guess I'll change my stance on game speed of battles this should be optional and player choice with either normal, slower, slow or faster like Paradox games
    6. Just have to say this because of OP and origional post "yo mama boy" lol
  • ThePurplePeopleThePurplePeople Senior Member Posts: 162Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Honestly, most of the changes I either like (the uni cards, limited armies) or ambivalent about (magic abilities).
    My biggest complaints are about the diplomacy. Even on normal campaign difficulty, it is impossible to secure alliances. As Rome, I had a positive standing with both Sparta and Athens. Diplomatic relations nearing 100. Still, they refused to do anything beyond a non-aggression pact. And I was really confused because a barbarian faction that I had never encountered but had declared war against just to secure a non-aggression pact from a neighboring barbarian faction begged me for peace and offered to become my client state. I'm not sure if that's broken, but I was confused by it. I'd never even marched on them.
    Worst of all, though, is that relations diminish so fast! You'll make a trade agreement with someone and 5 turns later, they'll be like "nope, we don't want your **** anymore". You'll look, and for no reason, your relations with them are almost back in the negative again because the good things you did are now too far in the past. How are you supposed to maintain trade agreements with nations that aren't constantly in wars for you to help them with?
    Oh, and it's cool that smaller nations have a chance, and I can understand the iceni or suebi disappearing (suebi are kicking a** in my campaign, though. It's annoying.) But in my campaign, in Lusty Jack's Macedon campaign, and in other peoples' as well, it seems like Carthage just gets their pretentious traders' behinds handed to them within like 20 or 30 turns. I think it's because they're so spread out to start. Makes for a difficult player campaign as carthage, which is cool, but I think for the AI's sake, you should give them some more of Carthago Nova's starting regions.


    >>>Not sure what's 'pretentious' about trading, but still. If you think back to all iterations of this game with mods too, Carthage always have it tough - spread out settlements, like the Seleucid's in RTW 1. They can't recruit top line troops except the Sacred Band and then only at Carthage. So if you were playing another action apart from CTH or Rome, 9 times out of 10, Carthage AI gets steamrollered by Rome AI.

    It's always been tough sledding as Carthage, who are one of my favorite factions, I never won the entire campaign with RTR and my own house rules playing as Carth but always had a lot of fun.

    Maybe they do need a little help in RTW 2 though.
  • SheperdSheperd Member Posts: 77Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1.UI Revamp
    2.AI Revamp
    3.Balancing
    -transport ships too strong
    -battles end too quickly
    -unis don't keep formation
    -AI is passive
    -make the game not boring
    -Loading times are a joke 10min lol ?
    -I can go on for hours
    4.Performance
    5.Free DLC's for causing so many people distress. You got enough money CA for this broken, unfinished product
    6.Portraits (they are atrocious)
    7.Add General Speechs ( You managed to waste money for a live trail and all these cinematics and voice acting in prologue, I'm sure you can find money for more important things)
  • DalamarthDalamarth Senior Member Posts: 202Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. Battles are being fought at LUDICROUS SPEED. I'll settle for Warp Speed, thanks.
    2. Missile trails are obnoxious. They worked great in Shogun 2.... What did you to do them to make them look like this? Also, flaming projectiles look lame.
    3. FORMATIONS. FIX THEM. Hoplites should not YOLO charge when in a Phalanx. Roman Infantry should not blob when attacked. Maintaining their formations was the single most essential thing these professional soldiers could do. Please please please fix this.
    4. CONSISTENCY! I click and drag with the middle mouse button to pan the campaign map.... But the campaign overview map, I HAVE to click and drag with the left mouse button. It's little inconsistencies like this that show a clear lack of polish.

    Other than that (and framerate issues on a machine that far exceeds recommended specs) I am enjoying the pants off of this game!
  • Pinkerton00Pinkerton00 Senior Member Posts: 471Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    [/B]

    >>>Not sure what's 'pretentious' about trading, but still. If you think back to all iterations of this game with mods too, Carthage always have it tough - spread out settlements, like the Seleucid's in RTW 1. They can't recruit top line troops except the Sacred Band and then only at Carthage. So if you were playing another action apart from CTH or Rome, 9 times out of 10, Carthage AI gets steamrollered by Rome AI.

    It's always been tough sledding as Carthage, who are one of my favorite factions, I never won the entire campaign with RTR and my own house rules playing as Carth but always had a lot of fun.

    Maybe they do need a little help in RTW 2 though.
    Haha, the pretentious thing was just me making fun of Carthage. The thing is, I'm playing as Rome. I declared war on them, but hadn't attacked them yet. I was about to attack Lilybaeum, but by the time I got there, it (and the city of Carthage, as well) had already been taken by some African faction. Carthage had been reduced to some region near the strait of Gibraltar before I'd even gotten to them.
    In previous builds of Rome 2, they had given Carthage more land in North Africa, but they decided to give it to Carthago Nova so Carthage didn't feel so OP at start. I'm just saying I think they went a little too far with that.
  • Stone FoxStone Fox Member Posts: 118Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Fatigue is still there, you mouse over. If you hold the mouse there for more than a few seconds it expands to show you everything. And yes, I've seen enemies wear themselves out charging me.


    Just want to say, I like the UI and the look and feel of the game for me. Runs smoothly with no performance issues or bugs. The only comment I would have here is what's with the 'black glass app' looking windows and screens? Surely some parchment or something more like Shoguns excellent presentation? (Although the encyclopedia is still a bit useless)

    Right, on to my main quibble.

    ARTILLERY SHIPS.

    They won't be brought in as reinforcements, even when they're blockading the port! I've tried numerous variations and the only way to get them involved is to initiate the battle *with the fleet*! Then, the Admiral gets all the bonus points... Wtf? And it's also the velites hexaremes.


    Oh, and an army skill tree, like the agents would be nice.
  • BarbolaniBarbolani Member Posts: 56Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Hi!

    My first post!

    Been playing TW since "Centurion" (Elder and experienced players will know what I mean, that is the REAL first Total War game, and was about Rome!!!)

    My constructive critic:

    - Easier manual: I want to know in a quick manner what is needed to build certain unit (techs and buildings), i.e elephants. I have trouble with this. Also things like the family affairs doesen't seem well explained.

    - Magic abilities: new from Shogun 2. Never had sense for me, the only abilities for a general are knowing to command his troops in battlefield... I never use them, so the AI has a Little advantage :)

    - UI: Yes, it seems the worse in TW series. The cards make me confuse too (between types of hoplytes, for example). Seems "Europa Universalis" :)

    - Magic transport boats: Does not seem realistic and it seems to make naval warfare useless. Yes, in "autoresolve" a pure navy with 1/3 units than a "transport navy" wins, butat least for me, in the battlefield I loose all the time (maybe also it is because I am **** playing on naval).

    - No "guard" button. That's one of the most important warfare concepts.

    - Short battles, and extremely quick, being a good general does not seem as important as it should be in TW Series (if this aspect is no good, then better play Civ or Firaxis games, isn't it?)

    - I like to play with tons of factions, and I like those factions dynamic and not static as "traditional TW barbarians", but if this mean 1 minute waiting until AI has moved, then the game rythm is ruined. Maybe making them a little less active, without agents...

    - The "my romans only throw spears when charge" issue dissapointed me too, but honestly, I do not think having those Hastatii only in guard mode launching tons of spears is realistic, so maybe is not that bad.

    - I'm still thinking how to survive (repeat, survive) after 30 turns with Carthage ;)

    - It is stupid placing a victory point in an openfield battle.

    - Overall performance, yes, I had to put a very ugly setting to play smoothly. And yes, lots of glitches etc.. but I'm sure this will be better in time.

    - Laserbeam arrows / spears / stones.

    I agree not complaining so much. It is the way software gaming developers work nowdays since internet distribution. 99% Of products are incomplete the release day. I remember Arma II.... the devs didn't even played the whole campaign :)

    See you in the Hades.
  • sonicasonica Junior Member Posts: 5Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Not so much wrong with the game as with CA. See if I was boss there I would now drop the hype and issue a statement with "sorry we got it wrong and so many people are disappointed ... we're listening and we're going to try our best to fix what we can" not the statement they released today with "we are very pleased with the response to ROME II, with hundreds of thousands of players enjoying the game so far" and ignoring the disappointment with the game made so clear on these forums. At the end of the day I am a fan of these games and will stick around for a company that cares. Eventually I will stop being a fan if the company doesn't give a **** about what I and its other customers really think.
  • RiithiRiithi Member Posts: 51Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    The UI has many usability problems that are new to Rome2.

    Examples:

    News that someone has died, doesn't say who,what or where.. not really helpful.

    Every other turn some character get's a household thingy, asking me to replace or put in the pool.
    After 50 turns I think I filled up my bingo card and had all different household thingies ingame.
    The biggest problem is that it tells me person X got something, but it doesn't tell me what he has currently, or where that dude lives, I don't know all characters by heart. So I cannot make an informed decision to replace etc. So what happens that I have to check manually after the fact which is just ****.

    The research UI is missing a LOT of information, information it USED to have before.
    I'd like to know what UNITS certain techs unlocks. It doesn't tell me, when playing Rome it's more straightforward, but when playing barbarians it get's really complicated. Apparently industry buildings unlocks units, might have told us.. geez.

    End turn warnings.. great idea, terribly executed.
    Personally I don't really care if I missed a character upgrade, no need to warn me, but if you do, give me a way to get to that unit. Instead of a warning box telling me I am a dumb player and forgot something, but not helping AT ALL.
    Same with tech, thanks for warning me, but pretty please give me a nice button straight to tech in that case.
    Or better indicate wehther something is being researched by altering the tech button in some way (coloring and/or animiation)
    Another option would be to clearly indicate that the just researched technology was the last in line, and since the tech tree isn't really that huge anyway, show the entire tech tree when opening the news item.
    So above it says, you finished tech such and such, with the tech tree showed underneath.
    Conclusion: thanks for reminding me that I forgot something, but when you do, please help me fix the problem.


    Later today I will try to get a civil war going, nothing in the UI tells me what the danger zones of civil war are.
  • BootstrapBootstrap Junior Member Posts: 28Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. Bad UI
    2. can't choose what AA I want (just on/off button)
    3. When clicking spacebar the battle slows down cause of the render
Sign In or Register to comment.