-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Total War: Rome 2 |OT| I Came, I Saw, I Came
- Thread starter Lingitiz
- Start date
Apparently there was supposed to be a beta patch released today, but it was pushed to tomorrow. Hopefully it helps those with really bad performance issues. I received a nice little boost in FPS thanks to the Radious mod.
Playing with the mod on is so much better than the vanilla game at the moment. The AI is actually managing their armies much better on the campaign map. The vanilla AI struggles to manage their food/squalor/public order well, resulting in crap units and attrition everywhere. The mod adjusts the values so the AI isn't as idiotic and doesn't struggle with management so easily. Battle AI is still iffy, but it's definitely improved.
Atraveller
Banned
I'm using an i7 3610qm, maybe it's the hard drive?
ndawgdrake
Member
Yikes, guess I'll hold off for now.
Performance is pretty decent for me with the Radious mod. Almost everything on Extreme I think with no SSAO, vsync or vegetation alpha. Shadows on very high since I get a big dip on ultra.
It's essential to have the unlimited VRAM on, it really helped the overall look of the game and performance. Big battles still aren't quite there yet, but hopefully the upcoming patches will fix it up.
I'm on an OC'ed 4670k at 4.2 ghz, 8GB ram, SSD, and 670 2GB btw.
Atraveller
Banned
ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
I'm about 10 hrs into the campaign, do the enemy armies ever use more advanced/elite units? Getting really sick of fighting the massive armies consisting of javs/slingers/ and shitty spears. Playing on normal, just did a battle 1500 vs 5000 and I won, mostly because those 5000 slingers are pretty shit in melee when facing legionaries. Probably my biggest complaint with the game.
Damn he hasn't been this angry in awhile lol. Makes me want to hold off on playing the game
Slackbladder
Member
I have a feeling a lot of these units are from early in the game and unless the army is defeated or loses them they are never replaced or upgraded. Maybe a faction that has been at war for many years has better units?
Cameron122
Member
This video hurt so good
Like getting a year old splinter out
Atra add me on steam so we can play Rome II in six months
Perhaps. The Seleucids in my game have been knocked around plenty, but suddenly they're the second strongest power in the game, and that's because they're using advanced units like cataphracts.
Not surprised to see war elephants destroy a ~2000 man army, enemy morale is all over the place. Heck, on hard I can charge levy spears with cavalry and win, but sometimes they'll never route. There was an Oathsworn general that killed 560 legionaries, despite being surrounded on all sides.
Have yet to get a civil war, do any mechanics change after becoming an empire?
Edit: Surprised war dogs are so useful. Since the enemy fields so many ranged units I can send them in and do more damage than cavalry. Will probably be balanced, but it's nice to have a reason to use them.
Atraveller
Banned
Sure, but I'm not good at this game.
Atraveller
Banned
Does anyone feel the texture pop-in is worse after the patches?
I never had any before the patches. At least my performance on the campaign map has improved somewhat.
Having tried out the Radious mods, I can definitely recommend them as well. Makes playing the game far more interesting. They should make a massive difference when starting a new campaign, especially. Although, I did edit his mod of the campaign map, where he allows factions to have twice as many armies/fleets. I changed that back to the regular amount, which I prefer. I also didn't bother with his graphical fixes.
Damn, Angry Joe's review is spot on.
Even though I haven't played much of the game (barely able to run it anyway) I feel he says exactly whats wrong.
It's so frustrating to see one of my favourite (if not my favourite) franchises being degenerated. It just sucks that they left out the little things that made the earlier games so good and replaced them with other, less complete things.
I miss the fact that you can't have a city view a la Rome 1, and the missing of the speeches sucks as well.
And sure those are little things, but those are little things that made the games great.
Even though I haven't played much of the game (barely able to run it anyway) I feel he says exactly whats wrong.
It's so frustrating to see one of my favourite (if not my favourite) franchises being degenerated. It just sucks that they left out the little things that made the earlier games so good and replaced them with other, less complete things.
I miss the fact that you can't have a city view a la Rome 1, and the missing of the speeches sucks as well.
And sure those are little things, but those are little things that made the games great.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
Angry Joe video review already posted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8 43 MIN YES 43 min thinking about making a thread about it its really really really good !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_QK-lcW8a8 43 MIN YES 43 min thinking about making a thread about it its really really really good !
spindoctor
Member
Having a blast with the game but I have to agree with him (halfway through the review). Love his using of the "What the Fox say?"! I also love him saying "I love the game but hate every minute of it!" its weirdly true!
Atraveller
Banned
The political system is a lackluster, AI needs some work. Has anyone in this thread encountered AI opponent running in circles or back and forth?
I never got the poltical system. I never paid attention to it.
I like how you're saying that they're pathetic while it's more likely Sega who's pushing them. Do any of you honestly think that CA didn't look twice at this game and know it would be broken at launch? The game has obviously been pushed out the door before the GTA/COD/BF4/Next-gen console craze begins.
The whole fall is PACKED with shit and any strategic games that isn't made by Blizzard would've been destroyed.
The game should've been released Q1 2014. As AngryJoe says - give the dedicated fans an opportunity (beta invite) to wreck havock on the game before release and NONE of the issues would've been present. At least if they would've listened.
TBH there is so much stuff wrong with the game in it's current state that I just cannot be bothered right now. I got my education, warhammer, training and other games (CoH2 and a dozen of console games) to play.
I got my TW "fix" and it ended rather fast due to the state of the game. I can wait now.
I want a better AI in both the campaign map AND in battle followed by optimization, unit balancing and all that jazz. It'll take time and I acknowledges that.
It's just a shame though because Rome 1 was my first total war game so it's kind of special to me thus making this a long awaited game.
With that said I'm happy that modders are so damn fast to do what it is they do. Eventually they, along with CA, will have nailed what people wanted from the game to begin with. It might take 1 month or it might be a half a year, but I'll wait.
For now it's back to studying neurologic diseases ._.
Atraveller
Banned
CA is going full Bethesda this time.
Slackbladder
Member
I've had an AI army who I'm at war with jump in a boat whilst I'm virtually knocking on their door! They rarely intercept my armies but it sometimes happens. It could be that my Roman armies are just too powerful for their wimpy barbarians to deal with!
More Fun To Compute
Member
Joe is playing Sparta and is complaining that battles are too easy.
Many people think that CA messed up and made Sparta infantry way too overpowered. (it's paid/preorder op bonus for loyalty or some nonsense)
Shogun 2 had some pretty awful battle AI especially in siege battles even though the forts in that were designed to have pretty simple attack plans. Sieges were just a joke a lot of the time and legendary was just a series of exploiting the bumbling AI as it threw huge stacks against your walls. In open field battles the AI would either throw it's army against your spear walls and die like flies or run away and camp on top of a hill in a forest waiting for you to slaughter them passively.
Rome 2 has some stupid stuff but it also has some smarter behaviour that has surprised me a couple of times.
Many people think that CA messed up and made Sparta infantry way too overpowered. (it's paid/preorder op bonus for loyalty or some nonsense)
Shogun 2 had some pretty awful battle AI especially in siege battles even though the forts in that were designed to have pretty simple attack plans. Sieges were just a joke a lot of the time and legendary was just a series of exploiting the bumbling AI as it threw huge stacks against your walls. In open field battles the AI would either throw it's army against your spear walls and die like flies or run away and camp on top of a hill in a forest waiting for you to slaughter them passively.
Rome 2 has some stupid stuff but it also has some smarter behaviour that has surprised me a couple of times.
Camp Freddie
Member
Joe is spot on.
The AI might be okay in field battles but you'll rarely fight them because the campaign AI is broken.
The AI has no idea what to do in settlement battles. It generally sends one of it's units to fight at a time, which get's massacred, and runs away past the next unit, which gets scared and breaks quickly, then they all run past the next unit, which breaks even quicker.
Joe doesn't have a problem because Spartan's are oily-skinned ninjas. It's that the AI does it's benny hill bullshit and doesn't actually fight. It often just runs through your units without trying to fight, and gets massacred.
The unit-blob problem is also huge. It really is like a mosh-pit, rather than ordered battle lines. That'd be fine for barbarians and cavalry, but not for Roman legions fighting Italian spearmen or greek hoplites.
The AI might be okay in field battles but you'll rarely fight them because the campaign AI is broken.
The AI has no idea what to do in settlement battles. It generally sends one of it's units to fight at a time, which get's massacred, and runs away past the next unit, which gets scared and breaks quickly, then they all run past the next unit, which breaks even quicker.
Joe doesn't have a problem because Spartan's are oily-skinned ninjas. It's that the AI does it's benny hill bullshit and doesn't actually fight. It often just runs through your units without trying to fight, and gets massacred.
The unit-blob problem is also huge. It really is like a mosh-pit, rather than ordered battle lines. That'd be fine for barbarians and cavalry, but not for Roman legions fighting Italian spearmen or greek hoplites.
Quite a bit. It mostly shows up when there is a large force battle and they defend. It's almost as if it's meeting different AI routine check points that cancels each other out.
"Light ranged unit in front, charge with levymen .."
"Within charge distance of Medium Melee, retreat.."
Repeat.
Atraveller
Banned
I just witnessed that in a naval battle, enemy ships kept going in circles until I sent two of my ships to attract their attention and draw them out.
Yeah, they really aren't bad in the open field. Siege battles though...my god they are terrible. I would rather have the towns simplified a bit if it made the AI behave in a more logical manner. Also, having reinforcements from sea makes sense but it is managed terribly. Defenders don't even place their units in formation compared to where your units are attacking from. When I start a siege, they should have missile on the wall and melee stacking the choke points. They never do that though...just sit around all areas of the town randomly.
Slackbladder
Member
I know a unit facing a much superior unit is much, much more likely to break and run, even before battle. Pretty sure it says that in one of thos blurbs on the loading screen.
I had a town defence against barbarian spearmen and slingers and one unit of 3 gold chevron Gladiators slaughtered 1000 of them whilst most of the others ran. I was outnumbered by a whole stack - 40 enemy units against my 20 but I only lost 400 whilst they lost 3500! But they did fight for a bit....
It's too easy to rank up yor army with agents. Sitting there not doing anything year after year and suddenly your unstoppable! Only because of an agent training the army. I think a better option would be that the agents experience bonus is only applied when a unit actually gets experience from a battle. Otherwise you become godly without ever drawing blood!
I had a town defence against barbarian spearmen and slingers and one unit of 3 gold chevron Gladiators slaughtered 1000 of them whilst most of the others ran. I was outnumbered by a whole stack - 40 enemy units against my 20 but I only lost 400 whilst they lost 3500! But they did fight for a bit....
It's too easy to rank up yor army with agents. Sitting there not doing anything year after year and suddenly your unstoppable! Only because of an agent training the army. I think a better option would be that the agents experience bonus is only applied when a unit actually gets experience from a battle. Otherwise you become godly without ever drawing blood!
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Game is good but has far too much bloat and has regressed from Shogun 2 in launch day (and week+ after) quality. Settlement/city battles are hilariously one sided in favour of the player due to how utterly incompetent the AI is at strategising. To be up against an army two if not three times the size of your own, with similar and counter units, and watch the AI totally fumble at using them is pretty bad. They'll run at the drop of a pin, routinely break formation, and show no sign of greater strategy. The AI really has absolutely no idea how to handle settlement and siege battles. Like, at all.
There's a lot of great stuff in this game, but yeah, colour me pretty disappointed. Most of the issues (except the stat bloat and clumsy UI) can be improved dramatically in patches, but for that reason I don't think anybody but the most forgiving Total War fans (familiar with the series launch issues) should bother with Rome II for another couple of months. I'm sure patches will improve the game significantly, as they've always done. But yeah, might as well pass for now, and play it when it's in a better state further down the track.
And I will say, as excellent as Shogun 2 and Fall of the Samurai were, I'm not entirely confident Creative Assembly is taking the series in the direction I want it to. Total War has always been a bit messy due to the scope, but I can't shake the feeling CA are just trying to pad the game with all this nonsensical stat, XP, RPG, perk, and other such junk that is so trivial and small scale in effect that it just serves as to bloat the formula and slow down the pacing of strategy. I think instead of keeping the parts that need to be simple simple, and focusing on the more crucial, wider complexities, they've done the opposite. Too much bloat on a micro level.
There's a lot of great stuff in this game, but yeah, colour me pretty disappointed. Most of the issues (except the stat bloat and clumsy UI) can be improved dramatically in patches, but for that reason I don't think anybody but the most forgiving Total War fans (familiar with the series launch issues) should bother with Rome II for another couple of months. I'm sure patches will improve the game significantly, as they've always done. But yeah, might as well pass for now, and play it when it's in a better state further down the track.
And I will say, as excellent as Shogun 2 and Fall of the Samurai were, I'm not entirely confident Creative Assembly is taking the series in the direction I want it to. Total War has always been a bit messy due to the scope, but I can't shake the feeling CA are just trying to pad the game with all this nonsensical stat, XP, RPG, perk, and other such junk that is so trivial and small scale in effect that it just serves as to bloat the formula and slow down the pacing of strategy. I think instead of keeping the parts that need to be simple simple, and focusing on the more crucial, wider complexities, they've done the opposite. Too much bloat on a micro level.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Shogun 2 had the advantage that the map was not also bloated and sprawling so they could have tighter faction balance and goals.
But when it came out there were threads full of people complaining how they hated CA for making a game that wasn't sprawling and unbalanced. They specifically hated how there was a real late game challenge.
The micro level needed more complexity a lot. In shogun 2 the lack of things like health meant that archers were a waste of time because when the battle started swords and spears just killed everyone in one blow and it came down too much to my attack is 1 larger than your defence so you all die. Maybe there are too many skill buttons in rome 2 and positioning is not so important with super hero units everywhere who don't care about being back charged.
But when it came out there were threads full of people complaining how they hated CA for making a game that wasn't sprawling and unbalanced. They specifically hated how there was a real late game challenge.
The micro level needed more complexity a lot. In shogun 2 the lack of things like health meant that archers were a waste of time because when the battle started swords and spears just killed everyone in one blow and it came down too much to my attack is 1 larger than your defence so you all die. Maybe there are too many skill buttons in rome 2 and positioning is not so important with super hero units everywhere who don't care about being back charged.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Parthian horse archers were legendary in the time for their victory against Roman legions at the Battle of Carrhae.
Many other military units from the time are legendary and have been in many popular movies, pamphlets, barn dances and so on.
But Alexander the great did not field an army of only his companion cavalry.
And Rome never fielded an army made up of gladiators and the personal guards of the emperor then used them to "hulk smash" whole armies with no tactics.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I agree with Shogun 2's tighter formula, and the issue with superhero units.
I don't really like the superhero units at all. This is kinda what I'm getting at with micro level pulp, where emphasis is taken away from broader military and political strategising and empire scale conquest and instead put on individual units and their special abilities and upgrades. Like, the little meticulous stat tweaking (+3% cunning or +4% zeal!!! make your choice!!!) is just bloat to me, an attempt to deepen the macro level with trivial incremental gains that give the illusion of choice at a level that doesn't need it. I like units and leaders gaining traits and such from behaviour of play, but I think the deeper stat building is nonsensical in the grand scheme of things.
Total War needs to step back and look at the big picture of what a campaign is about, and deepening the formula on that level. Less "how will you meticulously craft these little single percentage stats of one individual unit", and more "here are some new types of units, and new ways to strategise on the campaign map". Total War for me has always been about the campaign. Battles are just one part of it, and I don't think they need to be bloated with pseudo RPG fluff.
I don't really like the superhero units at all. This is kinda what I'm getting at with micro level pulp, where emphasis is taken away from broader military and political strategising and empire scale conquest and instead put on individual units and their special abilities and upgrades. Like, the little meticulous stat tweaking (+3% cunning or +4% zeal!!! make your choice!!!) is just bloat to me, an attempt to deepen the macro level with trivial incremental gains that give the illusion of choice at a level that doesn't need it. I like units and leaders gaining traits and such from behaviour of play, but I think the deeper stat building is nonsensical in the grand scheme of things.
Total War needs to step back and look at the big picture of what a campaign is about, and deepening the formula on that level. Less "how will you meticulously craft these little single percentage stats of one individual unit", and more "here are some new types of units, and new ways to strategise on the campaign map". Total War for me has always been about the campaign. Battles are just one part of it, and I don't think they need to be bloated with pseudo RPG fluff.
Cameron122
Member
Make crusader kings II's diplomacy turn based
Make combat real time like total war
Add mount and blade action mechanics
Good game
Make combat real time like total war
Add mount and blade action mechanics
Good game
Saw it this morning spot on. Don't know what happend there at CA but what horrible mess this is.
Beta patch 1.5 is out, you can opt in through fix.
Only 1 fix, campaign map performance
Patch 2 has been put back a bit:
http://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/88210-Patch-1.5-in-BETA-Today
Only 1 fix, campaign map performance
Patch 2 has been put back a bit:
http://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/88210-Patch-1.5-in-BETA-Today
Atraveller
Banned
I'm really started to notice the texture pop-in in the campaign map that wasn't present before the second patch. Hope this is an overall performance fixBeta patch 1.5 is out, you can opt in through fix.
Only 1 fix, campaign map performance
Patch 2 has been put back a bit:
http://forums.totalwar.com/showthread.php/88210-Patch-1.5-in-BETA-Today