Well, its finally out. I’ve been waiting a long time for this one. Its a very intersting game, though I’m finding it much more difficult to play than the other two…I still haven’t won my first game, though I’m holding my own around 100bc.
Especially the tactical battles are difficult this time…I’m having more trouble controlling and orienting my troops. Also, I haven’t figured out all the strategies for buildings yet. I have to admit that the tactical battles are just breath-taking…seeing your calvalry charge an enemy formation with the bodies of hapless Gauls thrown into the air…it brings a tear to the eye.
Well, you are in for a treat. One thing tactically I’ll comment on (as I just had it happen to me in a battle) is: Bridge defenses are no longer the god like things they were in the other two games. I just got essentially spanked by Gauls who only slightly outnumbered me even though I had a bridge defense with Early Legionary Cohort (heavy infantry), and plenty of archer support…AND a general with heavy cavalry.
I figured I’d take them easy (you can now choose your terrain…mountains, plains, bridge, whatever…its all part of the 3d strategic map)…but it didn’t work out that way. I won…but it was a pyrrhic victory.
Why is that? I mean, in theory it should still work. Bridge defences are inherently easy - only a small amount of his troops can be deployed at a time, while the rest are standing there, exposed, to your archers. As long as your units are better than his (and the whole point of the strategic game is to make sure they are), and your archers are still active, defending a chokepoint like that should be a piece of cake. Has the computer wised up and realized that the best way to take a bridge is to send its best heavy infantry over first to blast a way through, or does it still send cavalry?
All I know is I put two heavy infantry on the bridge as blockers, the way I usually put spearmen/pikemen in the other two games and they basically tore right through them in very little time…and these were Gauls, not exactly first class infantry. Its the only bridge battle I’ve had, so perhaps it was a fluke, but I’ve fought armies 3-4 times larger than my own in the other total war games at a bridge and decimate them…usually losing perhaps a hundred or so men for thousands of enemy. Maybe I just got spoiled.
It seems the computer is a lot smarter in the tactical battles I’ve fought so far. They use flanking a lot more, and come at you from different vectors instead of the same general axis of attack they used in the other games. Also, there is a new twist from the strategic map. If an enemy force is next to you, say on the right flank, and another force attacks you on the left, then on the tactical map thats exactly the placement. It can be a bit disconcerting when a second enemy force starts out in your rear for instance.
All in all this game is great…and will be even better when I figure out which buildings I want to optimize my own strategy. I’ve found that you HAVE to leave large garrisons in your cities or they tend to revolt…which kind of sucks from a money perspective. I used to like to leave my interior provinces lightly garrisoned and only heavily garrison the fronteer…you can’t seem to do that anymore, though it might be something I’m doing wrong. Too early to tell.
There are a lot of cool feature in the game…too many to get into right now. Hopefully if the thread takes off we can go over them for anyone interested. One thing that I knew about but is still a disappointment…the sea battles are still automatic, no tactical interface. The ships MOVEMENT is pretty cool, and ships take a larger part in this game (you don’t use your war ships for trade anymore, but can use them to blockade other ports and cut trade to other cities…trade is not automatic, so you don’t have to have a string of ships to have trade between provinces).
I was interested in getting a good wargame and this one was a contender. I tried downloading and installing the demo, but my spyware program popped up and said that they were trying to install some adware…
How does this compare to others on the market? Would this be a good one for a relative beginner? I considered getting Medieval since it was only $20, but if there’s a big difference in quality, I might splurge on this.
Well, I’d get the Medieval game (you can actually get the basic game AND the Viking expansion now for around $20 if you look around), and try that out first…see how you like it. Rome is a lot more complex (at least it seems to me so far), and I think the AI is a lot smarter also. I’ve been much more challenged in the tactical combats so far…either that or my units are a lot weaker than I think they are. Even the strategic map is more challenging, especially trying to do the various missions the Senate keeps throwing at me.
TW: Medieval is a perfect game for a ‘relative beginner’ IMHO…one of the best games of its type out there. I’m STILL playing it (or I was until Rome shipped), and I bought it the day it originally shipped…its that fun (well, for me anyway).
This should have been trade is NOW automatic btw. Its actually pretty cool…you see a visual representation of little trade ships and wagons on the 3d strategic map that indicates when trade routes are working. Its also a relief that you don’t have to manually put the trade routes in place by putting a line of ships from one port to another like you had too before.
I haven’t tried the multiplayer yet…haven’t even gotten through my first campaign yet for that matter. I assume multiplayer is the same though…just the battles. My guess is that attempting to play a campaign multiplayer (along with tactical combats) would simply take too long. Playing single player in a marathon (no pun intended) session, it took me 10 hours to get to 100bc…and I’ve managed to basically secure the Alps and part of Gaul so far. Greece is still a hot bed, as is North Africa, and Northern Europe.
SPQR!! Carthage is a royal BITCH btw…they have a huge fleet in my game, and they have those damn war elephants. Nothing like having a regiment or two of them charge your carefully constructed battle lines and decimate your crack legions. I haven’t tried the war dog things yet…maybe that will be the answer.
One of the really cool things in the game is that the tactical battles are just huge…you get ALL your troops (if they are close enough to the fight when it starts). The battle maps are big, with lots of room to move around. They give the impression that was lacking in the other two games of space so you can really go nuts with your tactical strategies. Part of the problem I’m having really is my reflexes are so tuned to TW:ME and TW:Shogun that I’m having trouble adapting to the new rules.
Another really cool thing is how you can get right down on the battlefield and see the troops fighting it out…and see when a General goes down. If your troops win the battle they raise their weapons in triumph…and before the battle is joined they clash their weapons on their shields and look determined. Its really something to see the fighting in such detail.
Just saw a story on the game on Fox of all places. They were talking about the fact that the game is used by the History Channel for its Decisive Battles show. Pretty cool.
Anyone else out there playing yet? What kind of units are you using to build your armies? What mix? What have you found useful, what useless? Anyone tried the war dogs yet or exploding pigs?
Its pretty different from TW:M RM. The strategic map is very different now for one thing. In TW:M when you invaded a province it caused a fight. Now you can go right into a province with your army and move around, destroying things or disrupting trade. You have to attack armies directly if they are in the field, or assault cities.
The city sieges are a lot different now too, with a lot more tactical possibilities on both sides.
You can only play one of 3 Roman families that I’ve seen so far. I am a bit disappointed that you can’t play the other nations, but maybe you will be able too in the expansion.
I’ll get into the units a bit later…this was just a drive by as I have to run out today.
whoa… so winning provinces is a timely thing ? Neat.
I thought that Medieval there was way to many buildings that had to be made for certain things… it was a major hassle and gold just to get simple upgrades. Does Rome have this a little more intuitively ?
Its much more realistic. The 3D strategic map actually reflects the game world instead of just being a picture. Your armies actually have a movement allowance on the strategic map. Roads allow you to move more rapidly. Items on the map have meaning…if you set up your army at a bridge then if you are attacked a bridge is where you are at. If you are in the mountains or woods on the map, then thats the terrain you fight in. Resources can be destroyed on the map, trade can be blocked, ports blockaded, etc. Its really pretty cool.
Your cities are like fortresses…its sort of like the old Lords of the Realm II game actually, but richer. City sieges are much better tactically than TW:ME…a lot more flexability and a hell of a lot more fun to do.
You now have advisors who will tell you what the various buildings are for. They can also suggest which building you should build next, but I don’t usually follow their advice. I’m still having a lot of trouble with the buildings (there are still a lot of them :))…I’m having trouble making my people happy so I can leave the cities lightly garrisoned and continue the attack. I’m hoping some dopers will have some thoughts on this eventually…if anyone besides me is actually playing this thing.
Unit tactics differences/mix…XT style: In TW:ME I relied mostly on infantry. My traditions mix was the best available spearmen (spearmen, sergeant’s, Italian Infantry, pikemen, Swiss Armored Pikemen, etc)…say 6-8 regiments. Next would be a good mix of archers and crossbowmen. Finally I’d like one regiment of heavy cavalry and a regiment or two of fast cavalry. I mostly used cavalry to flanking occasionally and pursuit for when the enemy would break.
So far in TW:R so far I’ve found that cavalry is more decisive. The ability to charge now really makes it something. Also, the units move more realistically, taking longer time to adjust to changes in direction…so you can really take advantage of enemy movements by hitting them off axis. Taking an enemy in the flank has a VERY noticeable effect now too both in casualties and in moral…very realistic. So, my mix right now is 4-5 legions of heavy infantry (as an aside, they have cool abilities like the tortoise where they can protect themselves from missile attack…really cool! Also if you put them on fire at will they will throw javelins first and then charge which is pretty wild), 2-4 regiments of auxiliary troops, javelin troops, a few regiments of archers (friendly fire seems to be a real problem…my traditional formations aren’t working well with archers atm, so I’m still thinking this through)…and the rest cavalry. Cavalry, both light and heavy, are decisive in TW:R IMO…at least so far. They are the most mobile troops, and mobility is much more realistic in this game than the other two.
According to the reviews I’ve been reading, you can play non-Roman factions (not all, but several of them) after beating them in a campaign game. Haven’t got the game yet myself, something I hope to remedy this afternoon.
I read that in the instructions too, but I haven’t gotten that far yet. I’ve still not managed to win a campaign…I am constantly running out of money and my cities are constantly on the verge of rebellion. The larger my empire has gotten the more unwieldy it has become, and its a major effort for me to put together another field army every time I want to take a new city/province.
When you get the game, definitely come back to this thread Gorsnak and give me your thoughts. Hopefully by then I’ll have figured some of this stuff out. I’m actually thinking about breaking down and getting the Prima guide for the game at this point since no dopers seem to be playing it.
I just played the demo yesterday; on medium difficulty, I was able to destroy the Roman army in the demo battle (Hannibel vs. Rome) with little trouble.
Well, a little bit of trouble. My elephants ran amok. Hoping it’d calm them, I took my general’s unit over near the elephants and used the “rally troops” button.
And watched the elephants charge the general’s group and trample all his bodyguards in the course of about three seconds. The general alone was left on his horse, looking stunned. I had him run away from the elephants pretty quickly :).
Has anyone tried out the demo, and how does its difficulty compare to that of the overall game?
I played one of the demo’s LHD…it was a pretty easy tactical situation. Pretty easy to win compared to most of the battles I’ve found myself in so far. The sieges are a lot easier, and I’ve found a ‘trick’ that you can use when you are under siege. Basically, you can now man the walls with archers and infantry types, many of who have ranged capabilities in the form of javelins. If the sieging army doesn’t have any siege weapons they can’t really threaten you…but if you force them to battle anyway by attacking FROM the city, they will mill around outside the walls…and be easy targets for your archers/range types. I’ve decimated armies this way multiple times. You just wait until your archers are out of missiles, then sally forth with your cavalry and finish off the survivors. Its kind of a cheap win, but I’ll take everything I can get.
The main trouble I’m running into is in the strategic part of the game, not the tactical. On the tactical side I’ve found that my infantry doesn’t do as well as infantry did in TW:ME or TW:S…but they still do ok. Cavalry seems to be much more powerful with the charge ability. Archers seem to be much more dangerous to your own troops in friendly fire incidents in set piece battles than they were in the other two games also. I haven’t had elephant regiments yet in the full game…I can’t wait to unlock the other nations so I can have some though.
