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

13468913

Comments

  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    MBL wrote: »
    I think the most things are allready written down. But I want to thank you for this thread, just this complainers everywhere make my furious. Imo CA wanted to improve to many things at once and that's why it's not as it should be.

    My pleasure dude, firmly believe that we are more likely to be listened to if we make it easier forCA to hear us! :)
    Goodbye
  • GasvaerGasvaer Member Posts: 71Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1.The ai builds like 18 units of archers, and 1 unit with the general and one mele unit thats all they do on verry hard
    2.cant have 2 generals in one city,
    3. the objective flag in Battle field battles needs to go, i cant even deffend a hilltop because the enemies storm the flag, (so mutch for tactics,
    4. one of there horse generals can storm into 3 bands of spearmen, he winn and routs them all, if i storm into a band of hillmenn my general dies,
    5. when i order my units to runn to a place i dont want it to engage the first enemy that it encounters i orderd it to move for a reason,
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    Something in the box besides a 3 page hot-key directory. A map would be nice. A tech/building/unit tree chart would be even nicer.

    Could not agree more! It is a complicated new setup to be sure!
    Goodbye
  • ArvenidesArvenides Senior Member Posts: 194Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    MP needs to get some major improvements: a global lobby, a better system for the chat, more options for quick battles, at least 2 or 3 minutes to finish your army composition after readying, and make it possible to look at our battle results and to save our replays without having to worry about the countdown if a player leaves the game.

    I'd like to have the old pila throwing back, being able to toggle it on and off. A defensive and aggressive stance would be welcome as well. Fire javelins and fire arrows for mounted units are ridiculous and should not be in the game IMO. I also personally don't find the high number of "magic" abilities for generals and units necessary and think some of it could be removed.

    There are plenty of areas to look into, but these were some of my criticism that I found worth noting. I've still enjoyed the game though, after managing to get the graphical texture and shadow issues fixed.
  • HWTsengHWTseng Member Posts: 82Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    I'm playing as Sparta, I'm rather bummed out that the Spartan village only has 3 building slots, and one of them is hard coded to be administrative building! I was planning to get maximum recruitment bonuses out of Sparta! but now I just have to make farms and move my recruitment center to Athens...

    Also ships seems to move slow..
  • DerMeisterDerMeister Junior Member Posts: 19Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    I posted this in the single player battles, but this would be a good place for it as well. I did some testing and have found the offensive Testudo is practically useless against defending from missile fire. Didn't test defensive, but from experiences, it seems to act the same.

    "Okay. Did some minor testing to see some actual numbers. This is a perfect scenario of Legionaries attacking a defensive infantry line supported by missile troops. I assault with 4 Legionaries in perfect order with no unit infront of the other. The march or charge was started outside the enemy range of fire with no fatigue. The ground to the enemy was very slightly inclined, but not by much. Enemy line consisted of 5 of the Roman Slingers (Don't recall exact name here) split with halt on the right flank and half on the left. 6 enemy Legionaries stood in 2 defensive lines with 3 units in the front line and 3 units behind them. The assault was done with the my left unit going for his left unit, my 2 center units going for his single center unit, and my right unit going for his right unit. Each unit had 80 men.

    To find the men killed before actual melee begins, the total men lost is recorded right before the first pilum is thrown.


    The first test was done with the slow march in Testudo formation in order to close with enemy lines while under fire. Three battles were done and this was the result.

    First Battle - 118 men out of 320 killed. 37% of entire force.
    Second Battle - 113 men out of 320 killed. 35% of entire force.
    Third Battle - 99 men out of 320 killed. 31% of entire force.

    Average - 110 men out of 320 killed. 34% of entire force.


    Now, with the second test, all things were performed in the same manner, except rather than marching in Testudo, the Legionaries simply charged at double time. Three battles were also done.

    First Battle - 29 men out of 320 killed. 9% of entire force.
    Second Battle - 38 men out of 320 killed. 12% of entire force.
    Third Battle - 35 men out of 320 killed. 11% of entire force.

    Average - 34 out of 320 men killed. 11% of entire force.


    So, with the above data we can say that it is 3 times as deadly to use Testudo than it is to charge. At least with slingers. I may do the same with javelins and arrows aswell.

    If this formation makes traversing areas under missile fire more deadly, then what exactly is it supposed to accomplish? At least the defensive Testudo provides an advantage in bracing and defense. The offensive one is practically useless as is.

    Am I missing the true use of this formation? I though it was designed to simple move troops closer to an enemy whilst under missile fire. As seen above, that certainly isn't the case here.


    *******************UPDATE*******************


    I decided for kicks and giggles, I'd run a third test. In this test, all factors are the same, except rather than march in Testudo or charge, I simple walked my Legionaries to attack their lines. The results were....strange.

    First Battle - 79 men out of 320 killed. 25% of entire force.
    Second Battle - 92 men out of 320 killed. 29% of entire force.
    Third Battle - 86 out of 320 men killed. 27% of entire force.

    Average - 86 men out of 320 killed. 27% of entire force.


    So, according to the results I have, Testudo is literally the most lethal way to approach missile troops. Something isn't right. Isn't it supposed to get an armor buff or something when in use?"
  • KimmyKimmy Member Posts: 54Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. Battles are over too fast. Don't up armour because that'll make archers obsolete. Don't increase defense because that'll make cavalry charges obsolete. Majorly reduce attack skill values across the board instead.

    2. Rebalance the units, especially the Romans. They get way too high stats for too low a price. 18/20 troops as legionairies is insane.

    3. The Suebi are missing wardogs(remember Teutoberg?) as well as pikemen(they were fond of long pointy sticks).
  • orctowngrotorctowngrot Junior Member Posts: 11Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Well.

    Positive Criticism: They could start designing the WHOLE game from scratch AGAIN! Or we can all go away and play something much better like the original Rome Total War game.
  • DerMeisterDerMeister Junior Member Posts: 19Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Well.

    Positive Criticism: They could start designing the WHOLE game from scratch AGAIN! Or we can all go away and play something much better like the original Rome Total War game.

    If only it was so easy.
  • pcokerjpcokerj Junior Member Posts: 2Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Lt.Chris wrote: »
    Many of mine are already mentioned but ill just post them anyway just so add 1 more vote on these issues

    1. Guard Mode Missing - Disastrous for someone who loves maintaining formation
    2. loose formation Missing - Annoying to not be able to do this when under missle attack
    3. Battles way too fast
    4. Diplomacy has been near useless since even friendly factions don't even want a trade agreement
    5. The "magical power ups" (just remove these from the game seriously)
    6. Not very clear on the conditions of units in battle - eg: Victory seems certain, Defeat is likely. It seems to suffer the "windows 8" simplify virus when they make it so simple its actually not simple because its all pictures
    7. The politics system seems to feel unfinished and doesn't allow you to properly inspect many details
    8. The ability for Romans to throw their missiles from standing and not just charging
    8. Romans take ALOT of losses in Testudo formation from missile fire than just standing in normally

    Great consolidation of problems Chris, Just wanted to add some 2 cents from other post that I agree with.

    9. Fix formations, battle becomes a mosh pit out there. The game lacks strategic depth and feels hollow.
    10. Squalor needs to be revamped or changed fundamentally to be more balanced.
    11. PLEASE increase the speed ships travel, transporting troops by boat should be at least 2.5X land movement.
    12. AI is suicidal on Map, Attacking towns with no chance of taking them.
    13. AI uses too little strategy in troop deployment and movement during battle. Medium Difficulty is too easy.


    I think many of you will agree, what would make this game much much more fun is to have land units move at 2X-3X speed. No way is it historically accurate to claim it takes 12 seasons to march 600 geographical miles. A half mile a day? IT DRIVES ME APES**T CRAZY. Best Mod i every played just fixed that issue.

    I understand you don't want an Enemy Army sacking your capital in one turn, So don't allow any nation to attack a city until at least 1 turn has passed after declaring war (Just like europa universalis makes you wait). Also, Make it so that any nation that has its territorial borders invaded triggers an ability to move a previously stationary Army towards the invading Army (Maybe a 1/2 movement penalty). Call it "Defend Territory" stance and it must be active before the invasion. That solves the hyper movement problem and adds 10X REALISM to the game.

    Invaders will be met out in the field and not at the gates of the city, like nearly every battle in ancient history. The politicians always send out the generals to engage the enemy in the FIELD. Engaging from a siege city is the absolute LAST resort and adds so much headache to a generals strategy.

    Please feel free to give feedback.
  • GorocentralGorocentral Member Posts: 107Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Lag, oh my lord, the lag... have mercy
  • super_newbie_prosuper_newbie_pro Senior Member Posts: 366Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    For me, excuse me the english is not my default language, Rome 2 is an very good game except bugs and stability ! But... But... i hate UI cards for Units !!!! OMG its horrible, i dont find quickly who is who in my troops ! And more, cards of buildings, WTF, its not fun because we cant see quickly what are different building like in Roma Surrectum 2 ! I would like remove banner above my units, its not realistic, same for round there at the feet of the soldiers, when their unit is selected, it's horrible, I'd love it to be removed, it is too seeing it spoils much fighting... I like the campaign map but... I saw ribs which were horribly made and cliffs plunging into the sea with ugly while the rocks are very detailed textures ... I do not understand how CA did not realize or saw this horrible appearance, which contrasts terribly with the high level of details of everything else. ditto for some mountains ... it's a shame because the rest of the landscape is beautiful and it is marred by basic and horrible textures, on cliffs and mountains, it looks posed quickly, to get rid, and to be able to focus on something else. Seeing that, we said: you need TONE from Roma Surrectum Team...

    I loved the diversity of faces and outfits, I also laughed listening to the soldiers talk to each other, it's great! I love the animations of the fighting, it is very well done. In fact, I find the land battles very good. For cons, I have much to criticize in naval battles, because there is not the main tactic for breaking enemy oars. CA replied that it required too much work and they did not provide the budget for that even if they reply me for oars they think they will fix it. Same answer for the unique animation when a ship is hit by another and explodes. I told them it would be more realistic than men is projected in the direction of impact, instead of jumping in the air! They told me it's too long to do, and they decided to focus on a single impact animation. I left with a huge desire: more animations impact, more naval activities, a lot of work there, but I do not know what can be done with MODS for naval battles.

    The vanilla game is excellent, the diplomacy system very good, we see that there was a lot of work on vegetation, they have obviously chosen the work of roma surrectum and did the same thing for their Rome 2. Personally, I think that there is less work to do in Rome 2 that in Rome one to make a good mod. In the sense of the amount of things to do or redo.

    if it could be help, i think its good to give the priority, for a good mod :
    - 4 seasons pear year ( Some guys have already done so, barely 48 hours after the game's release ! http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?618096-Released-2-turns-per-year-4-turns-per-year )
    - Countrys more bigger, size increase, map more realistic (we need wait tools for that :( )
    - Correct these horrible cliffs by the sea, seen in battles sometimes ... I do not know how they did it to not see the need to increase the level of detail on it. When approaching and you see the difference in detail between the sea and the cliffs on the impression of a game in 2013 combined with a game of 2003 ...
    - Realistic names of units
    - More vegetation, forests more realistic, more dense, more realistic kind, it was one of my suggestions before the game's release, but since the game came out and I've played, I think the vegetation very well, although I wish she was a little more important sometimes instead of having a horizon of sight without trees, not realistic for this epic time when we had not yet destroy forests of these country. A bit like RS2, perfect for that. ( maybe add an automatic reduction in detail in a progressive manner in 2 or 3 times, after some distance to compensate for the load calculations for the computer )
    - Change the look of caesar (he is not african !!!) and others mans on the campaign map
    - Change colors of the game in battle, some time its very very very too much dark, black are too much importantn and the color of the desert is horrible, when you take the screens in the desert and in photoshop it gives an automatic color correction, it gives a great show !
    - If you want / if you can, create city more realistic, create realistic villesp read, with all the monuments of the era, paying tribute to all those beautiful antique statues
    - Remove the banners above units for more realism
    - Increase number of historical informations / pop-up / letters : if this game could be a real historical book, fun to play, fun to learning, its cool
    And why not, dont forget to translate your mod in the main languages: English, Spanish, french

    My hopes for the next add-ons / DLC / improvements ? except the stability, crash and bugs, more animation effects for naval battles ... The possibility of the winter on the campaign map, a ride on two (or one of 4 with mods) ... A better IA, improve what they can improve... an adaptation of the faces of chiefs of units, the situation of their unit. When it is half damaged, a face that is not serene, but teacher ... When she was three-quarters destroyed, a bloodied face, like that

    Attachment not found.

    I also like the addition of blood in battle. But not blood like some comedies of zombies, where it squirts everywhere stupidly as if pierced a Fuel Tank Pressure. I would also like a correction of those horrible textures cliffs falling into the sea, it should be beautiful as the rest of the map! It is imperative to increase the level of detail on such landscapes who should be very beautiful ! Finally, I saw a monster mess with ships, which run on the side like a ferret playing jumping on the side, the ships advance (move) not in front of them but on left or on right (how its possible ?!) to unload their troops, ships stuck into each other as to create a "plug", with trains passing through boats, it's a beautiful mess and say, OMG what that?! They Have not finish this work! I even saw a ship totally on the sand, move on 360 degrees to reposition properly to discharge his troops ! I also think they did a very good animation work on the campaign map, we feel there is work but often in many places on the map, once the beautiful fog lifted because we explored the area, I think it is very (too) quiet about animations of the map except a camel passes by here or here, a bird ... I would have liked to see a black rain cloud who pass, rain, storm (i speak about the campaign map !), more animations on the ground, I do not know how or what, what you could increase, insert, but we need more alive on the map campaign. They did a good job, but it is certain that with a little thought and ideas, we can quickly make it all more alive !

    If I have to summarize, very good base game (vanilla). It does not lack much to make it perfect. For me, unnecessary rework (which takes a long time) on the skins of units, priorities are elsewhere.
    RTW 1 fan - betrayed, disillusioned, disgusted with Rome 2. For me, a Real Rome 2 (and finish) is Rome 1 + graphics/IA/Diplomacy of Rome 2, or the actually Rome 2 which we add all the functions mentioned here :
    - Campaign ==> http://tinyurl.com/nuxbr9k
    - Graphics / animations ==> http://tinyurl.com/pcv73nj
    - Audio ==> http://tinyurl.com/omnklxa
    - GAMEPLAY ==> http://tinyurl.com/n9bhqmc
    - Battles ==> http://tinyurl.com/ov9422g
  • Joey CAJoey CA Creative Assembly Posts: 750Moderators, Administrators, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
    edited September 2013
    Hi guys,

    Thanks for the input and feedback, as you know we're running 24 hours a day on our support section to iron out any issues and we have a patch coming on Friday. If there's anything I can help with please pm me and I will do what I can to help.

    Joey
    The Community Coordinator for Total War: WARHAMMER


    The formal disclaimer: any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of The Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • yongbing1yongbing1 Junior Member Posts: 19Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1.The years pass to quickly.
    one turn equals one year. this takes away some of the depth that previouse titles and it seems like it will ensure a very quick campaign which none of us want.


    2. Where did the seasons go?
    why take a step back when the seasons mechanic was so well recieved,again it removes some depth from the game that we all loved.


    3.The AI is totally buggy.
    in siege battles i have found that the AI sometimes makes almost no perpetrations to face me no archers on the walls no soldiers on the walls they just stay at their starting positions, among other less the logical choices.

    4.The campaign is to easy
    I was told the Spartan campaign would be beyond hard.....I already conquered Athens, Epirus and am getting ready to war with Macedon. I'm not impressed CA its too easy.

    These are just a few of the problems and I'm sure that many would like to see restored or handled. We can hopefully get our game fixed and playable and above all else fun and gameplay on a level that at worst is on par with previous titles and hopefully at best surpasses the previous titles.
  • yongbing1yongbing1 Junior Member Posts: 19Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Open field fights have gone the way of capture fights and not cunning and strategy. Please, improve battle. No, real challenge even hardest setting.
  • ElicasElicas Senior Member Posts: 218Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Joey CA wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    Thanks for the input and feedback, as you know we're running 24 hours a day on our support section to iron out any issues and we have a patch coming on Friday. If there's anything I can help with please pm me and I will do what I can to help.

    Joey

    Perhaps a sticky post from someone from CA stating exactly what you're planning on changing/updating.

    We have hundreds of people polled saying combat is too fast and arcadey, we have hundreds of complaints about Phalanxes not working properly, campaign AI being passive, diplomacy AI being too strict and not compromising, battle AI doing suicidal frontal charges, bad AI stack composition with too many skirmishers/ranged, overpowered transport ships and the capture points in land battles.

    These are all design decisions, no amount of optimisation will solve any of these issues.

    Are they being looked at, at all? Can you admit you've made some mistakes and are going to rectify them? A large amount of the flack CA are currently taking could be diluted with a simple statement saying where the game is going from here. I'm sure many peoples future purchases of CA games hinges on the support this game gets.

    No matter how well optimized it ends up, if the base game remains unsatisfying it will continue to generate negative feedback amongst the fans. Rome II has been worse received by the community than Empire was.
  • yongbing1yongbing1 Junior Member Posts: 19Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    This is not too much to ask and is not a frivolous request, either. Blood is standard and mandatory. I know you have a near daunting task ahead of you. But let me tell you, not every ROME 2 gamer is screaming for CA's hide but still many are very disappointed. Do surveys before making drastic changes--its marketing 101. Survey right now to find out what the gamers want. Its not too late. Also, it could save you time, work and money. Don't wait until the townsfolk are at the castle doors with tar and feathers. Ask them.
  • CloverClover Senior Member Posts: 4,964Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    yongbing1 wrote: »
    This is not too much to ask and is not a frivolous request, either. Blood is standard and mandatory. I know you have a near daunting task ahead of you. But let me tell you, not every ROME 2 gamer is screaming for CA's hide but still many are very disappointed. Do surveys before making drastic changes--its marketing 101. Survey right now to find out what the gamers want. Its not too late. Also, it could save you time, work and money. Don't wait until the townsfolk are at the castle doors with tar and feathers. Ask them.


    No blood, it brings nothing to the game. But there will be a blood pack soon.
    (\_/)
    (O.o)
    (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
  • Vuk11Vuk11 Junior Member Posts: 8Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    As a precursor I think three things need to be considered when fixing formation fighting and the Phalanx/Shield wall.

    1. How were they intended to fight? I'm sure we all expected Hoplite Phalanxes to hold lines and Roman legions to act like the old Shield wall meat grinder.

    2. How would someone new to the series think to use them? We learn quickly I'm assuming that double-clicking is a fast charge and single clicking is supposed to be a paced attack. Someone who picks up the game and reads the description would see that Hoplites in history were meant to use the Phalanx. They will see the Phalanx button, press it, go "ooh cool", then click to attack.

    3. How a battle should play out? It should be safe to say that most people view defensive units with Phalanx/Shield wall as line defenders? Among other secondary uses.

    So how I think it should be changed:
    - Make single click attacks in Phalanx/Shield wall a slow paced attack just like if you were to click behind a unit to slow march into them.
    - Units using these formations keep their formation tight instead of acting like liquids.
    - Give Roman legions Shield wall so they can keep formation and act defensively that way.
    - Buff Phalanx and Shield wall, so that a unit of equal stats/money value can't beat them in a front on front attack.

    Phalanx and Shield wall are supposed to hold lines, they are supposed to be effective front on attacks. They need to be able to attack, because if you can't attack in formation then they can only stand still or walk into enemies, that is pointless and no new player would think that is how they are intended to be used.

    A Phalanx unit should not be getting beaten by weak swordsman front on.

    Cheers.
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    Joey CA wrote: »
    Hi guys,

    Thanks for the input and feedback, as you know we're running 24 hours a day on our support section to iron out any issues and we have a patch coming on Friday. If there's anything I can help with please pm me and I will do what I can to help.

    Joey

    Thanks for the response and formal acknowledgement of this thread. Will pm shortly.
    Goodbye
  • ElicasElicas Senior Member Posts: 218Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    mechagran wrote: »
    Thanks for the response and formal acknowledgement of this thread. Will pm shortly.

    I PM'd him, suggesting a sticky outlining changes CA are considering making to core mechanics.

    No amount of optimization will stop the complaints of people unhappy with the base game.
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    Elicas wrote: »
    I PM'd him, suggesting a sticky outlining changes CA are considering making to core mechanics.

    No amount of optimization will stop the complaints of people unhappy with the base game.

    Hi, thanks for pm-ing him. Ive asked him to make this thread a sticky so we can try and pull together the various things that CAN be fixed by further patches. My view is of the various thousands of posts and views on this forum, there are about 20 identified issues that could be sorted and , could drastically improve the game play.

    People not liking videos in game, or the basic layout, yeah they are going to continue to have a problem I suppose but I think the list above could be addressed and the game would become a LOT more enjoyable generally.

    Let's hope they listen! :)

    Stay positive! :D
    Goodbye
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    DerMeister wrote: »

    >>>SNIP

    So, according to the results I have, Testudo is literally the most lethal way to approach missile troops. Something isn't right. Isn't it supposed to get an armor buff or something when in use?"

    Fair play that is some serious testing dude. I agree, my testudo does nothing for me except make me slower and more prone to missile attack. There is a balance issue there for sure. Hope CA are listening!
    Goodbye
  • za_dudeza_dude Member Posts: 32Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    And we need walls back !
    The whole point of walls was that a small defence force can hold on a town a turn or two until reinforcements arrive . Sometimes skirmish from Def . Also if the city was taken atacker would suffer some important lose most of the time. This was a good balance in the start of the game because nobody was rushing to fight left right and center.

    Also the whole point of small tribes and neutrals was to keep AI in bay for some turns. You know everybody was cleaning up the area , grow some economy and than make plans for war and great glory. Imagine half of the map in rome 1 owned by neutrals . Kinda this way it feels now .
  • Crestus MaximusCrestus Maximus Senior Member Posts: 207Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    Helloo,

    Things bothering me greatly about the game as it is: Terrible performance on my machine, campaign map jittery, battles slow on medium setting when i could run Shogun 2 on high very smoothly.

    Things i miss: Family trees, seasons and agent/character videos.

    Well that's me done, i enjoy the game, i just wish i could play it reasonably smoothly.

    Edit* Oh and er, if Shogun 2 could have beautiful art everywhere and a slick, artsy presentation why is Rome 2 stuck with what looks like place-holder pics in comparison? Could not Greek, Roman and Celtic art styles have been used?
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    A further addition.

    Twice this morning on the turn of Gallicea (?) the game got "stuck". By this I mean I left it to complete the run, had a shower came back and it was still on it.

    Not a good thing when Im about 8 hours into my Roman campaign!
    Goodbye
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    Also just a quick THANK YOU to all of those of you who have contributed to this thread. I doubt CA can ignore these points when there have been 10,000 views and almost 180 posts.

    I have Pm'd Joey to make this a sticky. Please ask others to add their thoughts on here from other posts. So they dont get lost in all the other stuff being posted! Thanks!
    Goodbye
  • sccrboi01sccrboi01 Senior Member Posts: 330Registered Users
    edited September 2013
    1. Squalor needs to be redone
    2. Battles too short
    3 AI needs a little work
    4. Fix Diplomacy BIG TIME
    5.Take capture points out of open field battles
    6.Where are the huge cities during siege assault Ex. Carthage (I just finished a turn where I am rome and was assaulted by an enemy army in the city of carthage. When the map was loaded it wasnt a huge beautiful city but a small little town with a small wall and a port nothing else....I dunno what happend there anyone else notice this with any of the other supposed major cities like rome athens alexandria etc???

    Edit: Sorry also why when I am at war with another faction I can walk all around their territory without attrition but when I besiege/blockade them I suffer attriton??? Sorry doesnt fly with me lol
    Most peoples' response to Rome II expansion...."Please Sir may I have some more"......

    My Massagetae, battered and bloody, but undefeated in the field! True masters of battle :)! Masters of campaigning on the other hand, unfortunately not.......:(
  • mechagranmechagran Banned Posts: 136Banned Users
    edited September 2013
    sccrboi01 wrote: »
    1. Squalor needs to be redone
    2. Battles too short
    3 AI needs a little work
    4. Fix Diplomacy BIG TIME
    5.Take capture points out of open field battles
    6.Where are the huge cities during siege assault Ex. Carthage (I just finished a turn where I am rome and was assaulted by an enemy army in the city of carthage. When the map was loaded it wasnt a huge beautiful city but a small little town with a small wall and a port nothing else....I dunno what happend there anyone else notice this with any of the other supposed major cities like rome athens alexandria etc???

    I had a similar issue with Rome where it defaulted to a smaller map a bit more like syracuse. Was quite weird but made me win easier I guess. Im sure that is in the patch as others have mentioned it. Thanks for your input.
    Goodbye
  • bankerisbankeris Junior Member Posts: 3Registered 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.

    -1, dont agreee tottaly. Flags defence makes a lot strategy for attackers and defenders.
Sign In or Register to comment.